The last observable related to this: For any & every - #30 by cameron
However, this suggestion is drawn from a much larger sample of instances and personal experiences.
I would dare to state that a big part of responsibility for wasting time on “half-baked ideas” falls on lack of place for such.
Possible idea stages (of course there are all shades of grey, but this is a very rough attempt to classify):
- 1% baked. Creator is only starting to explore the idea, has not tried implementing it, it is vague, unexplored, no ground is covered, it’s all up in the air. However, he has a feeling that he might want to explore it as it aligns well with what he is interested in and how he would like to contribute to python in a long term. However, he would like to gauge the interest and get some initial feedback. Where does one go? Also, at this point it is very easy to destroy the idea by experienced (although not very careful) members of the community. Even if the idea in itself has a potential to grow into something beneficial, it has little to no defence at this stage (especially for someone who is just starting).
- Idea is 50% baked. There is a certain need for it and there are undeniable benefits. however, it is still uncertain whether it should be part of python (and not in external package). Also, a lot of aspects of it are not resolved. However, the idea is ready to withhold a criticism and a certain amount of it is very healthy to it too.
- Idea is 95% baked. There is alpha version of how it would look fully implemented. It can be tested, benchmarked and its specification is unambiguous and there is a hard case for it, etc, etc.
Where does one go at each stage to get feedback?
What are the guidelines for each stage?
- ???
- Somewhat clear.
- Well defined. https://peps.python.org, https://devguide.python.org
Proposals
So I have 3 proposals. 1. is a potential quick fix. 2. is a potential improvement in resources and 3. is 5%-baked idea for consideration.
- Quick fix. New topic group for “half-baked ideas”. Name it “Open-ended ideas” or whatever else appropriate. In this case, if the idea is posted to “Ideas” and is deemed 1% complete can be moved there. Anyone who doesn’t want to waste time on such ideas, just doesn’t go there. Also, it should be clear what qualifies for what. Otherwise, there will be endless discussions, whether this idea should be there or there.
- Centralization of resources. A place where a high level overview of idea cycle is laid out with well structured resources and guidelines. So that a person of ANY level of expertise with ANY idea has a place to exist. I have also observed that big part of a problem is inability to understand what is meant by a certain combination of written words. Thus, developing(collecting) definitions into a glossary might be of benefit. E.g. “baby-idea”, “half-baked-idea”, “pep-worthy idea” or whatever.
- general development for infrastructure for the lifetime of an idea. I have briefly touched on it in: Meta: how we evaluate / reach consensus on / approve ideas as a community - #19 by dgrigonis. It would involve developing of quantitative measures / rules of thumb for quicker decision making. Some of these are already here, such as
github grep usage
and would only need to be integrated better into the process. Others are hard to quantify and a lot of time is wasted arguing about them endlessly. E.g. good python syntax descriptors:
* Verbosity ratio = number of characters / number of operations
* Readability ratio = % of correct responses from AI prompt: “Explain what this human meant by this sentence: "…"”
To sum up:
- Low effort. The questions to answer here is: “What qualifies for a good post in "Ideas"?”. What sort of posts do not qualify, but have intrinsic non-zero value and where should such conversations and discussions can be accommodated?
- Medium effort. Maybe such place exists already and I don’t know about it?
- High effort, (but IMO can be an interesting project). This idea is 5% baked. I am still unsure if it would be net beneficial, whether people would appreciate it and to what degree this could be achievable given the state of the community. Nevertheless, it might be a beneficial step to accommodate more efficient development cooperation in a growing community.
Afterthoughts:
- How can one ever be sure, that the most (seemingly stupid) idea doesn’t hold potential for something paradigm changing (it might look nothing like the initial idea 5 years later though)?
- One of the roles of a good mentor is to help one persist in its stupidity.
- Sometimes people just want to talk their ideas out without being judged (too much) and they look for more appropriate place for it. If the most appropriate place is not appropriate it leads to dissonance.