[Numpy-discussion] Numpy governance update

josef.pktd@gmai... josef.pktd@gmai...
Wed Feb 15 20:07:06 CST 2012


On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
> <d.s.seljebotn@astro.uio.no> wrote:
>> On 02/15/2012 02:24 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
>>> There certainly is governance now, it's just informal. It's a
>>> combination of how the design discussions are carried out, how pull
>>> requests occur, and who has commit rights.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> If non-contributing users came along on the Cython list demanding that
>> we set up a system to select non-developers along on a board that would
>> have discussions in order to veto pull requests, I don't know whether
>> we'd ignore it or ridicule it or try to show some patience, but we
>> certainly wouldn't take it seriously.
>
> In the spirit (as I read) of Dag's post, maybe we should accept that
> this thread is not going anywhere much, and summarize:
>
> The current situation is the following:
>
> Travis is de-facto BDFL for Numpy
> Disputes get resolved by convening an ad-hoc group of interested and /
> or active developers to resolve or vote, maybe off-list.  How this
> happens is for Travis to call.
>
> I think that's reasonable?
>
> As far as I can make out, in favor of the current status quo with no
> significant modification are:
>
> Travis (is that right)?
> Mark
> Peter
> Bryan vdv
> Perry
> Dag
>
> In favor of some sort of formalization of governance to be decided are:
>
> Me
> Ben R (did I get that right?)
> Bruce Southey
> Souheil Inati
> TJ
> Joe H
>
> I am not quite sure which side of that fence are:
>
> Josef

Actually in the sense of separation of powers, I would vote for Chuck
as president, Travis as prime minister and an independent release
manager as supreme court, and the noisy mailing list community as
parliament.

(I don't see a constitution yet.)

Josef

> Alan
> Chuck
>
> If I missed someone who gave an opinion - sorry - please do speak up.
>
> I think it's clear that if - you, Travis, don't want to go this
> direction, there isn't much chance of anything happening, and I think
> those of us who think something needs doing will have to keep quiet,
> as Dag suggests.
>
> I would only suggest that you (Travis) specify that you will take the
> BDFL role so that we can be clear about the informal governance at
> least.
>
> Best,
>
> Matthew
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list