Re: bring back nntp library to python3

On 15/08/24 10:56, Alan Gauld via Python-list wrote:

On 14/08/2024 23:32, Left Right via Python-list wrote:
Lots of people care but the ability to influence these
decisions seems to have been removed far from the
general python user community. Python has moved from
the BDFL/Bazaar to the Committee/Cathedral. Probably
an inevitable consequence of its current "popularity".

Perhaps in the ?good, old, days when Python was the small, scrappy language a strong community formed because there was a strong sense of "us" - as in, "us against the world". This atmosphere generates "cohesion" within the group.
Does it (still) exist today? Where/when?
Python is a victim of its own success. It is now used in so many different fields within computing it is not possible for one person to say "I use it all". Thus, when someone says (s)he is a "Python Programmer" what is meant is most-likely one of web/front-end work, back-end/server/networking, data science, machine learning, etc.
As a PUG-Leader, this a daunting part of trying to generate and keep 'community'. 'Data science people' won't attend 'web' meetings (by-and-large), and vice-versa - indeed some even feel the 'right' to moan that some other area of Python happens to be the topic for the next meeting.
The converse view (which is seldom well-taken if offered as a riposte to such complaints) is that if folk volunteer in some way, their efforts will (most likely) be embraced with gratitude - but how many do make such offers/participate in a practical fashion!
Whither community? Cohesion?
Thus, a grave difficulty for leaders who are unable to see these sorts of concerns - and act accordingly. A shift that should have occurred within steering groups as Python grew in popularity, was to add applications-expertise to the central group of Core Maintainers. However, unless there is trust and respect between members, one may be (too) quick to reject comments and ideas from 'another'.
Perhaps Python's state-of-democracy is heavily influenced by nation-state politics, where the desire for division seems to be overwhelming ideas of community/society? How does such benefit community - those represented?
Growth and size will inevitably require adaption. Almost inevitably it brings 'structure'. Whereas some do care (per @Alan's point), the average Python-programmer probably doesn't understand the current structures, and might even eschew such/reject their need.
How does this fit with "community"? What is personal-responsibility? What channels should folk be using? Are members of the community feeling 'heard'?
If a committee perceives themselves besieged, the tendency is to look inwards and become determinedly-defensive - which, in cases like this, is likely the exact opposite of what the decision's opponents desire!
How should a 'community' handle such? How should decisions be made, and then communicated in such a way as to promote and build community, even though some members may be disappointed?
Recently there was an election for PSF members. Did 'everyone' participate?
What decision-making processes are usable in the face of such large numbers - and how seriously are/would they be taken by 'the average Python user'?
--
Regards,
=dn