[Numpy-discussion] Numpy governance update

Matthew Brett matthew.brett@gmail....
Wed Feb 15 20:12:06 CST 2012


On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 6:07 PM,  <josef.pktd@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.

That sounds dangerously Canadian ...

But actually - I was hoping for an answer to whether you felt there
was a need for a more formal governance structure, or not.

> (I don't see a constitution yet.)

My feeling is there is not enough appetite for any change for that to
be worth thinking about, but I might be wrong.

See you,


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list