Re: [PSF-Community] PSF Newsletter
[Antoine] > Can you simply post a link every quarter to this list? I would find that convenient as well. Regards, Matt ___ PSF-Community mailing list PSF-Community@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/psf-community
Re: [PSF-Community] [PSF-Vote] Members Needed for PSF Sponsor WG
[Marc-Andre Lemburg] > Let's practice some more by engaging the voting members in more > decisions and by the time we run next year's board election, things > should have settled in just fine (so he says...). I personally think that's an excellent idea. And here's a thought: PEP 1 says that a PEP should provide a rationale. And what is a PSF board resolution if not a PSF-EP? Regards, Matt ___ PSF-Community mailing list PSF-Community@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/psf-community
Re: [PSF-Community] board candidates: tell me about transparency
Please correct me if I get any quoting below wrong, it seems to have come through a bit confused. [Steve Holden] > For Heaven's sake. We elect a board to look after these issues. You > can't expect to second-guess every deliberation. If you want to do > that, stand for the board. [Karl Karsten] > I have no idea what the individual board members think. Even when > there is a unanimous vote, I still don't know why they voted that > way. I too think it's legitimate for members to want to know not just the "what" but also the "why". [Steve Holden] > Because that's what they thought would be in the Foundation's best > interests. The PSF is a pretty big organization now. (Though I don't seem to be able to find a recent budget to see just how big. Is that a fault in my searching?) I think that members could have an interest in something more than belief in good intentions. The same good intentions can lead different people to different conclusions. I bet even Perl programmers have good intentions! Regards, Matt ___ PSF-Community mailing list PSF-Community@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/psf-community
Re: [PSF-Community] Sponsor Members - Bylaws Revision
Marc-Andre, > We did consult the existing sponsor members I'm sorry. perhaps I should have said: I'm surprised that the board didn't consult the non-sponsor membership. Can you tell me the thinking behind that? > As I mentioned in the email, the main purpose is to simplify > sponsor signup. That doesn't answer my question. I didn't ask why the idea is a good one. I asked why the membership wasn't consulted. > Overall, the PSF is moving more and more in the direction of > trying to engage our members in the operations of the PSF. > We're doing this by opening up WGs That also doesn't answer my question. Regards, Matt ___ PSF-Community mailing list PSF-Community@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/psf-community
