[Numpy-discussion] What is consensus anyway

Matthew Brett matthew.brett@gmail....
Wed Apr 25 15:35:36 CDT 2012


On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Travis Oliphant <travis@continuum.io> 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
> incomplete.

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 mailing list