I don’t know if you follow the Python issue tracker especially. For some particular reason I subscribed to the Python Bugs List a while ago, which emails you with updates to all issues on the Python tracker. Obviously it’s quite a moderate volume list, but I’m quite good at pressing the delete key :). And what it’s shown lately is that there’s an enormous amount of activity around the tracker.
This falls into three broad categories: issue assessment; post-PyCon work; and general issue activity.
The first is due to a series of energetic stints by Daniel Diniz (aka ajaksu2) who seems to have undertaken to go through pretty much every single issue still open and to assess its continuing validity (does it still apply?), to set the relevant flags (Python 2.6? 3.0? interested developers?), and to work out a slightly more robust set of workflow tags (needs patch, needs test) to indicate what state the issue’s in. Looks like Tennessee Leeuwenburg is also keen on pepping-up the workflow and statuses. (Not sure who’s exactly driving, so apologies if I’ve miscredited).
The upshot is that a whole slew of outdated bugs have been closed or tagged as likely to close in the absence of confirmation from their original submitters or other interested parties. In addition, many more issues have been looked at with a view to their current state: patches, tests, docs etc. and flagged appropriately. I suspect that there will be some things closed a bit over-zealously but it’s great to see some people with a sense of responsibility for the state of things. We all know there are too few developers to cope with even assessing let alone critiqueing or implementing every issue, but it really helps to have a Spring Clean.
The other thing which is evident is a post-PyCon rush of issues being dealt with (and in some cases, raised) as a whole bunch of developers sprint during or after the conference. Jack Diederich has taken it upon himself to deal with all the outstanding telnetlib issues. Likewise, Michael Foord (of IronPython fame) seems to be heading up an initiative to give the unittest module a much-discussed overhaul. The indefatigable Georg Brandl has continued his maintenance of the docs and the Sphinx system which builds it. And obviously, many other people working on particular issues.
And of course there’s the ongoing work by everyone in the community to report bugs, suggest improvements and help to reproduce problems and post patches. I’m not sure whether the nett number of open calls has increased, decreased or remained stable, but the very activity itself gives a clear sense that the Python community is alive and kicking and concerned about improving things.