[Numpy-discussion] Numpy governance update - was: Updated differences between 1.5.1 to 1.6.1

Matthew Brett matthew.brett@gmail....
Tue Feb 14 19:00:26 CST 2012


Hi,

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Travis Oliphant <travis@continuum.io> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When we selected the name NumFOCUS just a few weeks ago, we created the list
>>>> for numfocus and then I signed everyone up for that list who was on the
>>>> other one.      I apologize if anyone felt left out.   That is not my
>>>> intention.
>>>
>>> My point is that there are two ways go to about this process, one is
>>> open and the other is closed.  In the open version, someone proposes
>>> such a group to the mailing lists.  They ask for expressions of
>>> interest.  The discussion might then move to another mailing list that
>>> is publicly known and widely advertised.  Members of the board are
>>> proposed in public.  There might be some sort of formal or informal
>>> voting process.  The reason to prefer this to the more informal
>>> private negotiations is that a) the community feels a greater
>>> ownership and control of the process and b) it is much harder to
>>> weaken or subvert an organization that explicitly does all its
>>> business in public.
>>
>> Your points are well taken.   However, my point is that this has been discussed on an open mailing list.   Things weren't *as* open as they could have been, perhaps, in terms of board selection.  But, there was opportunity for people to provide input.
>
> I am on the numpy, scipy, matplotlib, ipython and cython mailing
> lists.  Jarrod and Fernando are friends of mine.  I've been obviously
> concerned about numpy governance for some time.  I didn't know about
> this mailing list, had only a vague idea that some sort of foundation
> was being proposed and I had no idea at all that you'd selected a
> board.  Would you say that was closer to 'open' or closer to 'closed'?

By the way - I want to be clear - I am not suggesting that I should
have been one of the people involved in these discussions.  If you
were choosing a small number of people to discuss this with, one of
them should not be me.  I am saying that, if I didn't know, it's
reasonable to assume that very few people knew, who weren't being
explicitly told, and that this means that the process was,
effectively, closed.

See you,

Matthew


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list