[Numpy-discussion] Numpy governance update

Christopher Jordan-Squire cjordan1@uw....
Thu Feb 16 15:06:11 CST 2012

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Charles R Harris
> <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Travis Vaught <travis@vaught.net> wrote:
>>> > On Feb 16, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Travis's proposal is that we go from a large number of self-selecting
>>> >> people putting in little bits of time to a small number of designated
>>> >> people putting in lots of time.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > That's not what Travis, or anyone else, proposed.
>>> Maybe I was unclear -- all I mean here is that if we suddenly have a
>>> few people working full-time on numpy (as Travis proposed), then that
>>> will cause two things:
>>>  -- a massive increase in the total number of person-hours going into
>>> numpy
>>>  -- a smaller group of people will be responsible for a much larger
>>> proportion of those person-hours
>>> (and this is leaving aside the other ways that it can be difficult for
>>> full-time developers and volunteers to interact -- the volunteers
>>> aren't in the office, the full-timers may not have the patience to
>>> wait for a long email-paced conversation before making a decision,
>>> etc.)
>>> I think Travis' proposal is potentially a great thing, but it's not as
>>> simple as just saying "hey we hired some people now our software will
>>> be better". Ask Fred Brooks ;-)
>> What, you are invoking Fred Brooks for a team of, maybe, four? Numpy ain't
>> OS/360.
> For the general idea that you can't just translate person-hours of
> effort into results? Yes, though do note the winky emoticon, which is
> used to indicate that a statement is somewhat tongue in cheek ;-).
> Do you have any thoughts on the actual content of my concerns? Do you
> agree that there's a risk that in Travis's plan, you'll be losing out
> on valuable input from non-core-contributors who are nonetheless
> experts in particular areas?

I'm not really sure how. All the developers involved are attentive
enough to make announcements of pull requests and requests for
comments on proposed changes. So if there's expert opinion to be had
easily, i.e. through the mailing list, then I can only imagine they'd
go out and get it.

This also jibes with Benjamin Root's comment. Major changes will be
discussed anyways. So I'm not sure how this particular objection is


> -- Nathaniel
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list