[Numpy-discussion] Removing datetime support for 1.4.x series ?
Mon Feb 8 21:17:04 CST 2010
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 21:05, Matthew Brett <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> Is that a real question?
>> Absolutely. What leads you to believe that the reasonable arguments
>> aren't being heard? If one were to start a thread giving an idea and
>> no one responds while vigorous discussion is happening in other
>> threads, that would certainly be visible evidence of that idea not
>> being fully heard. I'm something at a loss to guess how you would
>> ascertain from a thread that has now gone past a hundred messages
>> (most of which favor the side I presume you think the unheard
>> arguments are coming from) that some of the arguments are not being
>> fully heard.
> Of course we were always discussing judgement calls, and these are
> always going to be subjective, but I don't think that means that we
> can't hope to come to a reasoned agreement. I only wrote because I
> felt that we were beginning to drift towards a formal committee-style
> judgement in a situation where it has been pretty clear what the
> majority view was, and that we have to be careful about that, because
> it can reduce our feeling of shared ownership and responsibility - a
> feeling that numpy has been remarkably good at maintaining.
Majorities don't make numpy development decisions normally. Never
have. Not of the mailing list membership nor of the steering
committee. Implementors do. When implementors disagree strongly and do
not reach a consensus, then we fall back to majorities. But as I said
before, majority voting requires conscientious control over the voting
membership or it isn't majority voting. The process that you
identified as being remarkably good at maintaining shared ownership
and responsibility isn't majority rule, but consensus among
implementors. We just don't have that right now, but we need to get
stuff done anyways.
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
More information about the NumPy-Discussion