I’m not going to go through and tag everyone - hopefully candidates are watching the board (if not, well, that answers a slightly different question that I’m only asking implicitly ).
Also posting this in Users so that the external nominees can participate - please avoid answering if you are not a nominee (FWIW, I’ll restate my suggestion that nominees should have been temporarily added to the Committers group so this wouldn’t be an issue and we wouldn’t be asking everyone to watch every post, but I guess since that was in the least popular governance PEP everyone else wants the council to have to watch everything… )
Here is the question.
What are your thoughts on a Direction Group?
To add some context, this document (PDF) is the current report from the C++ Direction Group. It includes a small section on the group’s history and make up, and their charter, which I reproduce below (emphasis mine):
The direction group is a small by-invitation group of experienced participants who are asked to recommend priorities for WG21. Currently, that group consists of: Howard Hinnant, Roger Orr, Bjarne Stroustrup, Daveed Vandevoorde, and Michael Wong. Their charter includes setting forth a group opinion on:
- Evolution direction (language and library): This includes both language and library topics, and includes both proposals in hand and proposals we do not have but should solicit. The direction group maintains a list of the proposals it considers the most important for the next version of C++ or to otherwise make progress such as in a TS, and the design group chairs use that list to prioritize work at meetings. Typically, work on other topics will occur after there’s nothing further left to do at this meeting to advance the listed items.
- Providing an opinion on any specific proposal: This includes whether the proposal should be pursued or not, and if pursued any changes that should be considered. Design group participants are strongly encouraged to give weight to an opinion that the direction group feel strongly enough about to suggest.
I am interested in candidates’ positions on having such a group, whether they believe the council can/will sufficiently fill this role, whether Python has a need for a more formalised approach to defining its evolution, how you would advocate/propose such a group be set up and operate, or anything related to this subject.