[Numpy-discussion] Numpy governance update

Jason Grout jason-sage@creativetrax....
Thu Feb 16 06:38:41 CST 2012

On 2/16/12 6:23 AM, Francesc Alted wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
>> On 2/15/12 6:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>>> But in the very end, when agreement can't be reached by other
>>> means, the developers are the one making the calls. (This is
>>> simply a consequence that they are the only ones who can credibly
>>> threaten to fork the project.)
>> Interesting point.  I hope I'm not pitching a log onto the fire
>> here, but in numpy's case, there are very many capable developers
>> on other projects who depend on numpy who could credibly threaten a
>> fork if they felt numpy was drastically going wrong.
> Jason, that there capable developers out there that are able to fork
> NumPy (or any other project you can realize) is a given.  The point
> Dag was signaling is that this threaten is more probable to happen
> *inside* the community.

Sure.  Given numpy's status as a fundamental building block of many 
systems, though, if there was a perceived problem by downstream, it's 
more liable to be forked than most other projects that aren't so close 
to the headwaters.

> And you pointed out an important aspect too by saying "if they felt
> numpy was drastically going wrong".  It makes me the impression that
> some people is very frightened about something really bad would
> happen, well before it happens.  While I agree that this is
> *possible*, I'd also advocate to give Travis the benefit of doubt.
> I'm convinced he (and Continuum as a whole) is making things happen
> that will benefit the entire NumPy community; but in case something
> gets really wrong and catastrophic, it is always a relief to know
> that things can be reverted in the pure open source tradition (by
> either doing a fork, creating a new foundation, or even better,
> proposing a new way to do things).  What it does not sound reasonable
> to me is to allow fear to block Continuum efforts for making a better
> NumPy.  I think it is better to relax a bit, see how things are
> going, and then judge by looking at the *results*.

I'm really happy about Continuum.  I agree with Mark that numpy 
certainly could use a few more core developers.  I've not decided on how 
much structure I feel numpy governance needs (nor do I think it's 
particularly important for me to decide how I feel at this point on the 


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list