[SciPy-Dev] SciPy governance model

[Matthew Brett]

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:13 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:03 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:37 AM, Eric Larson <larson.eric.d at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> My feeling is that having a clear leader in place is important, so I'm
>>>>> also leaning away from the numpy model towards one where
>>>>> responsibilities are more explicitly assigned.  Exactly how to best
>>>>> make
>>>>> that assignment is still unclear to me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1 for BD(FL) / leader-style from me, too. I like Matthew's suggestion
>>>> of the top 5 active folks discuss to see which of them are actually
>>>> interested in taking on that role.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback everyone. Looks like everyone likes this
>>> suggestion so far, so we'll give that a try.
>>
>>
>> Hi all, I'm happy to report that we've worked this out. Pauli was our
>> preferred candidate, and he has agreed to take up the role of BDFL!
>
>
> Hi all, it has taken a while longer than I had planned, but here is a PR
> with the draft governance doc: https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/6953.
>
> Review and feedback very welcome. If there's something really major about
> the structure of it, this list is probably a better place to discuss then on
> the PR.

The main question I'd like to raise, is whether we really want a BDFL,
as opposed to an elected projected leader.

I think a BDFL makes sense where there's one person who started the
project, wrote most of the code (at least at some point in the
project's history), has been in charge since the beginning, and is
still very active.   I think that does correspond to the situation for
Linus  / Linux; Guido / Python; and Fernando / IPython.   I don't
think we have anyone matching that description in Scipy.

On the other hand, I do think it's important to have a project leader,
with final authority on the direction of the project, and who takes
responsibility for the health of the project.

So, I propose, rather than have a BDFL, we have a system for choosing
a leader, say every 4 years, where we may or may not have limits on
the number of consecutive terms.   We can use that 4 year cycle to
make sure we're reconsidering the direction of the project regularly,
and thinking about where we could improve, and where we might be
messing up.   It provides a natural way to give people a rest from the
job, if they want one.   If one leader steps back, and sees another
leader doing something better than they did, they can learn from that
when they next have a leadership term.

Of course that requires some formalization, but I think it's a
considerably better system than the BDFL, for our case.

Cheers,

Matthew