[Numpy-discussion] Comments on governance proposal (was: Notes from the numpy dev meeting at scipy 2015)

[josef.pktd at gmail.com]

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 12:04 AM,  <josef.pktd at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 10:22 PM, Eric Firing <efiring at hawaii.edu>
> wrote:
> >> > On 2015/09/04 10:53 AM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:33 AM, Matthew Brett <
> matthew.brett at gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>> Hi,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Chris Barker <chris.barker at noaa.gov
> >
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>> 1) I very much agree that governance can make or break a project.
> >> >>>> However,
> >> >>>> the actual governance approach often ends up making less difference
> >> >>>> than the
> >> >>>> people involved.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> 2) While the FreeBSD and XFree examples do point to some real
> >> >>>> problems with
> >> >>>> the "core" model it seems that there are many other projects that
> are
> >> >>>> using
> >> >>>> it quite successfully.
> >> >>
> >> >> I was just rereading the complaints about the 'core' structure from
> >> >> high-level NetBSD project leaders:
> >> >>
> >> >> "[the "core" and "board of directors"] teams are dysfunctional
> because
> >> >> they do not provide leadership: all they do is act reactively to
> >> >> requests from users and/or to resolve internal disputes. In other
> >> >> words: there is no initiative nor vision emerging from these teams
> >> >> (and, for that matter, from anybody)." [1]
> >> >>
> >> >> "There is no high-level direction; if you ask "what about the
> problems
> >> >> with threads" or "will there be a flash-friendly file system", the
> >> >> best you'll get is "we'd love to have both" -- but no work is done to
> >> >> recruit people to code these things, or encourage existing developers
> >> >> to work on them." [2]
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > This is consistent with Chris's first point.
> >>
> >> Do you mean Chris' point that "I very much agree that governance can
> >> make or break a project"?   Charles Hannum's complaints about NetBSD
> >> are very specific in blaming the model rather than the people.   I
> >> think the XFree86 story supports the same conclusion - that the
> >> governance model caused a sense of diffused responsibility that lead
> >> to bad decisions and lack of direction.
> >>
> >> >> I imagine we will have to reconcile ourselves to similar problems, if
> >> >> we adopt the same structures.
> >> >
> >> > Do you have suggestions as to who would make a good numpy president or
> >> > BDFL and potentially has the time and inclination to do it, or how to
> >> > identify and recruit such a person?
> >>
> >> That's a good question, and the answer is that in the current
> >> situation (zero interest in this discussion from the three current
> >> members of the numpy leadership team) - no reasonable person would be
> >> interested in that job.   That's the situation we're in, and so we
> >> have to accept that nothing is going to change, with the consequences
> >> that implies.   If the situation were different, and we had the
> >> interest or commitment to explore this problem, then I guess we could
> >> discuss other options including the one I suggested further up the
> >> thread.
> >
> >
> > "
> >
> > Today, the project is run by a different cabal.  This is the result of a
> > coup that took place in 2000-2001, in which The NetBSD Foundation was
> > taken over by a fraudulent change of the board of directors.  (Note:
> > It's probably too late for me to pursue any legal remedy for this,
> > unfortunately.)  Although "The NetBSD Project" and "The NetBSD
> > Foundation" were intended from the start to be separate entities -- the
> > latter supplying support infrastructure for the former -- this
> > distinction has been actively blurred since, so that the current "board"
> > of TNF has rather tight control over many aspects of TNP.
> >
> > "
> >
> > "
> >
> > The existing NetBSD Foundation must be disbanded, and replaced with
> >    an organization that fulfills its original purpose: to merely handle
> >    administrative issues, and not to manage day-to-day affairs.
> >
> > "
> >
> >
> > It doesn't sound to me like a developer and community driven governance
> > structure to me.
>
> I think that's a separate issue - the distinction between the 'board'
> and the 'core'.   It would be great if the 'core' concept was fine as
> long as there is no 'board' but I think that's a hard argument to
> make.
>

there is an "esprit de corps" pronounced "esprit de core" but not an
"esprit de board"

I trust the core developers, but not ...

But maybe I don't understand some definitions

"

The "core" group must be replaced with people who are actually
   competent and dedicated enough to review proposals, accept feedback,
   and make good decisions.

"

I thought that's what the "core" group is.

Josef



>
> Cheers,
>
> Matthew
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20150904/f888ac87/attachment.html>