Hi everyone,
There have been some wonderfully vigorous discussions over the past few months
that have made it clear that we need some clarity about how decisions will be
made in the NumPy community.
When we were a smaller bunch of people it seemed easier to come to an agreement
and things pretty much evolved based on (mostly) consensus and who was
available to actually do the work.
There is a need for a more clear structure so that we know how decisions will
get made and so that code can move forward while paying attention to the
current user-base. There has been a "steering committee" structure for SciPy
in the past, and I have certainly been prone to lump both NumPy and SciPy
together given that I have a strong interest in and have spent a great amount
of time working on both projects. Others have also spent time on both
projects.
However, I think it is critical at this stage to clearly separate the projects
and define a governing structure that is fair and agreeable for NumPy. SciPy
has multiple modules and will probably need structure around each module
independently. For now, I wanted to open up a discussion to see what people
thought about NumPy's governance.
My initial thoughts:
* discussions happen as they do now on the mailing list
* a small group of developers (5-11) constitute the "board" and major
decisions are made by vote of that group (not just simple majority --- needs at
least 2/3 +1 votes).
* votes are +1/+0/-0/-1
* if a topic is difficult to resolve it is moved off the main list and
discussed on a separate "board" mailing list --- these should be rare, but
parts of the NA discussion would probably qualify
* This board mailing list is "publically" viewable but only board
members may post.
* The board is renewed and adjusted each year --- based on nomination
and 2/3 vote of the current board until board is at 11.
* The chairman of the board is voted by a majority of the board and has
veto power unless over-ridden by 3/4 of the board.
* Petitions to remove people off the board can be made by 50+
independent reverse nominations (hopefully people will just withdraw if they
are no longer active).
All of these points are open for discussion. I just thought I would start the
conversation. I will be much more active this next year with NumPy and will
be very interested in the direction NumPy is taking. I'm hoping to discern
by this conversation, who else is very interested in the direction of NumPy so
that the first board can be formally constituted.
Best regards,
-Travis
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
