[Numpy-discussion] What is consensus anyway
Wed Apr 25 15:35:36 CDT 2012
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Travis Oliphant <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I don't agree here. People work on open source to scratch an itch, so the
> process of making a contribution needs to be easy. Widespread veto makes it
> more difficult and instead of opening up the process, closes it down. There
> is less freedom, not more. That is one of the reasons that the smaller
> scikits attract people, they have more freedom to do what they want and
> fewer people to answer to. Scipy also has some of that advantage because
> there are a number of packages to choose from. The more strict the process
> and the more people to please, the less appealing the environment becomes.
> This can be observed in practice and the voluntary nature of FOSS amplifies
> the effect.
> It is true that it is easier to get developers to contribute to small
> projects where they can control exactly what happens and not have to appeal
> to a wider audience to get code changed and committed. This effect is
> well-illustrated by the emergence of scikits in the presence of SciPy.
> However, the idea that "people work on open source to scratch an itch" is
Do you agree that Numpy has not been very successful in recruiting and
maintaining new developers compared to its large user-base?
Compared to - say - Sympy?
Why do you think this is?
Would you consider asking that question directly on list and asking
for the most honest possible answers?
More information about the NumPy-Discussion