Creating a "python-dev" equivalent category

Please read again my rationale. Committers are already using to discuss topics which would belong to python-dev if they would be posted to a mailing list. My concern is that they post to Committers whereas only core dev can reply there.

I am not the one who “took the decision” to use to discuss Python development.

But which ones are really active ? The Committers category is. The Users category, mildly. The Ideas category? Most discussions still seem to happen on the python-ideas ML. As for core-workflow, it’s difficult to judge, as there aren’t many discussions on both channels.

I read your rationale. I disagree with it. Did you read my comment? People should be directed back to the mailing list, pointing out that we’re not yet using Discourse for python-dev discussions.


The reason I posted here (the Users category) was because it says Users and the tooltip says ‘General discussion forum for the Python language. All welcome’

I’ve given up on comp.lang.python because google groups lets in so much spam it is impossible. (I did try flagging the spam for about a year but gave up.)

So I was hoping this would be a saner place for Python users.

But if that’s not its purpose, maybe the name ‘Users’ should change and certainly the tooltip.
My hope though is that it really will become a nice alternative to comp.lang.python: the rust discourse is a pleasure to use and no spam or discourtesy.

On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 15:30:11 +0000
“Victor Stinner via Discussions on


I believe @willingc and @pablogsal are going to (but I might be remembering wrong).

We have a steering council for a reason. :wink:

@vstinner I’ve started a draft PEP in my personal repos and invited @pablogsal to collaborate.

Similar to the process that we used for governance, I want to take an informational first pass of all of the communication mediums currently in use. Thanks to dev guide, Victor, and other resources, we’ll have a reasonable first pass.

Right now a very rough outline is in the repo (willingc/pep-communication). I have more extensive notes on paper (as I think better that way). I also plan to do some metrics for usage of various mediums.

As an FYI, I suspect that the best path forward is unlikely to be always mailing list or always Discourse.

If others wish to contribute or be co-authors, please leave a note in the issues for the repo.

1 Like

Oh nice, I didn’t know that Carol was working on a PEP. So things are moving on :wink:

1 Like

Do you happen to have a link for the repo?

OK, but while we’re deciding whether to do (3) or not, we also have to pick either (1) or (2). I get that you like (3), maybe it’s the right decision, idk, but there’s obviously no consensus yet, and if you look around you’ll notice it isn’t actually happening (e.g. I haven’t seen anyone telling Guido that he’s doing it wrong).

So in the mean time, while that’s getting sorted out: do you prefer (1) or (2)?

I think I’ve put my vote in before, but I’m going to vote again for a python-dev equivalent category.

New PEPs are being posted to the Users category so that people can reply. General support requests and user discussion are also posted to the Users category.

Because of the latter, I have the category muted and intend to keep it that way. But this means that I don’t get to see new PEPs that are not also shared to python-dev (and somehow rise above the less-and-less relevant chatter on that list).

A category for “open discussions not covered by python-ideas or python-list (equivalents)” would be very helpful.


Thanks @steve.dower for raising the issue. Let’s start with a PEP discussion category and see how that goes for a few months. We can iterate to a larger scope over time.

1 Like

Created the PEPs category in response to this with the expectation that if we needed to open up a wider category we can do so in the future.