On 3/18/2019 9:21 PM, John Sullivan wrote: > Bruce Perens <br...@perens.com> writes: > >> 2. Use PEP. This appears to be an RFC-like process, and I am not yet clear >> how it avoids the complaint about the present process, which is that >> discussion of the proposal on a mailing list seems to be un-trackable or >> uncomfortable. Python mostly used the python-dev mailing list. > As one of the people who suggested something along these lines -- it > helps with tracking because a document is developed during the > conversation, and conversations can be expected to refer to the > document. Revisions of the document are posted periodically with a > standard subject line so that people who have not been able to track the > discussion threads can jump in, see where things stand, and still > contribute meaningfully. > > It doesn't help with the uncomfortable part. > > -john > Here's something to ponder - what if the license submitter was asked to maintain the PEP.
Pam Pamela S. Chestek Chestek Legal PO Box 2492 Raleigh, NC 27602 919-800-8033 pam...@chesteklegal.com www.chesteklegal.com
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
