On Sep 6, 5:49 pm, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: > lkclwrote: > > On Aug 21, 12:58 am, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote: > >> In article > >> <77715735-2668-43e7-95da-c91d175b3...@z31g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > > >>lkcl <luke.leigh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > >>> if somebody would like to add this to the python bugtracker, as a > >>> contribution, that would be great. alternatively, you might like to > >>> have a word with the python developers to get them to remove the > >>> censorship on my contributions. > >> Excuse me? What censorship? > > > i was ordered to cease contributing to python. > > As I remember from the public discussion, you were asked to cease using > the bugtracker as a progress blog ...
i used the bugtracker as a substitute for svn access, so that other people who may be interested could follow, pick up and contribute. to describe valuable contributions as "a prrrogress blllllooggggg" makes it sound like the work is at the same level as much of the mindless drivel found on e.g. wordpress. if that's how it was being viewed, then it's no wonder there were complaints. at the time that i was ordered to cease contributing, the work done passed all but 8-12 of the standard python regression tests. out of several thousand. > > the cause was the > > provision of a port of python to run under mingw32, which passed all > > but eight of the regression tests. > > and wait until you had a complete patch to submit. 1) i've stopped. it's declared complete. there. it can now be added. does that help? 2) you know as well as i do that there is never going to be a "complete" patch. no-one in the world is a "perfect" coder. work is _always_ ongoing. there is _always_ going to be "a better patch". 3) "wait until there is a complete patch" flies in the face of the basic tenets of both commercial _and_ free software development. you _never_ "wait until the work is completed". release early, release often, remember? > There is also a real > question of whether such ports should be folded into the main CPython > code base, as some have been, or maintained as separate projects, as > other have been. the mingw32 port comprises two (necessary) features: 1) cross- compiling support, which the mingw32 port uses to create python.exe (from a posix system) 2) actual support for mingw32-compiled python, including proper support on ILP32 systems, checking support for features properly using autoconf tests not "#ifdef WIN32" etc. etc. cross-compiling of cpython is tricky as hell, starting from pgen and going from there, to create python.exe. to be able to run that - in order to compile the modules and run the regression tests is _even more_ tricky. but - it's been done. roumen and the other contributors to the cross-compile support have consistently had their contributions considered to be worthless, basically, for nearly five years, now. _despite_ clear evidence indicating a need, and clear requests for cross-compiling to be included in the standard python distribution. for example, from the gentoo team, who have a bitch of a job cross- compiling python for embedded-mips systems. then there's the issue of continuing to rely on the proprietary microsoft compiler toolchain. you _know_ that's going to cause problems, ultimately, with an important free software project such as python. so to throw mud in the face of people willing to think ahead and put in the work to get you [PSF / python-devs] out of a potentially difficult [political/strategic] situation is just ... i don't understand it. i even solved the issue of compiling python under mingw32 using assemblies, so that it could be linked against MSVCRT80, 91 etc. these kinds of multiple interdependent technical issues aren't the sorts of things you "put into a single patch and then stop" - you keep on at it, picking at one part of the pattern, moving to the next issue, pick some more, solve that, and keep moving. so - these are the kinds of things i received [not exact words]: "please stop submitting continual patches, we think it's about the same level of value as some of the trash we see on wordpress.com". "please stop doing work because we think it's worthless". "we don't really like and don't really want to maintain the win32 port of python anyway, so why are you bothering to work on it?" do you notice a theme, here? there isn't anything which is particularly encouraging. or places any value on the work being done. or indicates a willingness to extend free software. this theme was so completely contrary to what i was expecting [openness, trust and respect] that i just... went "does not compute" and continued coding. i don't mean that in a flippant way - i really _mean_, my mind went "this message [from e.g. martin] doesn't match my expectations of a free software project developer/contributor. what's the next technical challenge i have to solve?" note the discontinuity in the internal dialog between those two sentences. there was no _judging_ of the message received; no "pffh. that idiot. let's spend some time and energy _actively_ dismissing the person and the message". it was _literally_: "does not compute. equals zero. next issue on list: do coding". it's a pathological approach, i know - but it's one that solves technical issues with extreme [some say alarming] speed. anyway. it was an interesting experience. and you can make use of someone with such capabilities, and _not_ get stressed, and work out how to make use of them -or you can throw their work in their face, and move the goalposts around, close all their bugreports (making up reasons where possible) - all to get them to "go away". "stop increasing my stress levels". overall, from the experience, i did get the overall impression that the core developers are slightly overwhelmed, and don't have time to focus on anthing other than what's already on "the roadmap". i.e. "unscheduled" major free software contributions - such as ports to new systems - are viewed as a burden rather than a responsibility that should, without question and without hesitation, be incorporated and encouraged, in order to increase the reach of python and in order to build a stronger, larger python community. one of the arguments utilised to discourage the work on the mingw32 port was that "it would have to be supported - by us. officially." such statements are self-fulfilling, and increase the "burden of responsibility" and the stress. a very sensible person told me that stress is where the mind has an internal picture (expectations / viewpoint), makes a comparison with the outside world, and the discrepancy is so large that the mind CANNOT COPE.... and seeks to place BLAME on the EXTERNAL world. if people are willing, there are _always_ ways in which contributions can be accepted, such that free software can progress. it's just that in the [extremely rapid] development cycle of the mingw32 cross- compiled port of python, i didn't meet the "expectations" of the python developers. there's nothing i can do about peoples' _internal_ expectations, and i'm really sorry, but i don't have the social- interaction-capacity to _understand_ peoples' expectations [i don't get enough practice]. so, i "make do" by assuming that free software people are always going to be receptive, enthusiastic, open and encouraging, and that, when they encounter an experience that indicates that they might fall short of the "ideal" free software project, they'll move sharp-ish to correct the issue encountered. my limitations are that if they're _not_ any or all of those things, or if those corrections _aren't_ made, i simply do the mental equivalent of "syntax error. decrease priority of message. pop(next task on stack)". i don't _forget_ the incoming message - it just gets... a lower priority, and thus appears to have been ignored. "too much energy will be consumed processing this discrepancy between _my_ ideal expectations of how free software contributors should communicate, and work on free software, and this message. that's a distraction from spending energy on getting free software work done. decision equals easy: work on free software". that's what happened to you, martin. it looked like i was ignoring you. it also didn't help that i also was sufficiently busy focussing approx 11 hours non-stop a day for several weeks that some of the things you asked me to stop doing, so as to reduce your stress levels, i _literally_ didn't see them. martin and guido: you asked me to apologise, some months ago. to do so requires that i express clearly what it was that i was apologising _for_, as what i'd already apologised for simply wasn't enough and wasn't clear enough, (and my previous apologies had several areas where people assumed the worst, and assumed that i was trying to disguise ego trips as apologies). that's taken nearly a year to go by, for me to subconsciously work on what to say, and work through it, above. so - with the context above: you can understand and appreciate this: that i'm sorry that i have different expectations of how free software projects should operate, and for not knowing what the right thing to do is when my expectations aren't met. as in - i _really_ don't know. i seem to have this strange belief that if you solve the technical challenges, people will work out how to move the goalposts _towards_ incorporating the solutions, rather than away - _irrespective_ of the "social" issues, placing "social interaction" issues at absolute rock-bottom priority against achieving the technical goal. i'm sorry that this ethos and the beliefs and expectations that i have cause people distress. l. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
