Thanks for spending the time you do on the steering council, especially since you are already investing yourself in the community somewhere else.
I was wondering:
1 - Is there some entity in charge of the global vision for the Python language right now?
The BDFL used to implicitly fill this need, but and correct me if I’m wrong, it does not seem to be the role of the steering council.
I am worried that agglomerating ideas from all the core devs, be it under the supervision of the SC, may not be enough to keep the Python experience to something coherent and practical on the long run. Or to maintain balance between modernity and compatibility.
If I’m wrong, then what is currently the vision? If I’m on to something, do you think it would be in our interest to setup a mechanism to build a vision?
2 - Can you give us an update about the packaging debate?
Packaging is still a hot topic after all those years. I remember a recent long thread on twitter with several members of the community, of Pypa, and Peter Wang from anaconda, that ended up with a lot of strong points like:
python is currently used as a sdk and a runtime
packaging pure python libs is easy, but end user applications hard, however people confuse both use cases
python import system was as the root of this situation
This is a very dear topic to many, so what can you tell us about it?
3 - Do you believe we should reopen debates on features that never made it to python or consider them permanently off scope?
Some ideas such as exception-catching expressions, pattern matching, null coalescence, dict unpacking, etc. have been heavily discussed on python-ideas, but never transformed into reality. Some of them because they weren’t championed, many because they were rejected.
However, the walrus operator prove that things that would have been vetoed by Guido van Rossum 10 years ago may be considered ok now. On the other hand, the ex-BDFL has given us the clean language with have today by virtue of refusing a lot of things.
What is your take on this?