PEP 8002: Add a small rationale
This commit is contained in:
parent
19c5d2c2a7
commit
6be6383c42
24
pep-8002.rst
24
pep-8002.rst
|
@ -21,6 +21,30 @@ Rather than an individual PEP for each of these community surveys, they will
|
|||
all be collected here in this PEP.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Rationale
|
||||
=========
|
||||
|
||||
CPython is not the first open source project to undergo a governance crisis.
|
||||
Other projects have experimented various governance options, sometimes several
|
||||
times during their existence. There are useful lessons to take away of their
|
||||
experience, which will help inform our own decision.
|
||||
|
||||
Project choice
|
||||
--------------
|
||||
|
||||
There are many open source projects out there, but it will be most fruitful
|
||||
to survey those which are similar enough to CPython on a couple key metrics:
|
||||
|
||||
1. the number of contributors and their activity (there are scaling issues that
|
||||
don't make the governance models of very small projects very enlightening
|
||||
for our purposes) ;
|
||||
2. being mostly or partly community-driven (company-driven projects can afford
|
||||
different governance options, since the company hierarchy has power over
|
||||
the main participants) ;
|
||||
3. being faced with important design decisions that require a somewhat formal
|
||||
decision process.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Rust
|
||||
====
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue