[Pandas-dev] Mailing list for Python data analytics ecosystem developers?

[Andy Ray Terrel]

I added you directly. I have the access to "anyone can join" but perhaps
I'm missing something. I'll keep poking around.

On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:49 AM Wes McKinney <wesmckinn at gmail.com> wrote:

> I got a permission error because it's a private domain (I don't have a
> @pydata.org e-mail address)
>
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:46 AM Andy Ray Terrel <andy.terrel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > It is managed by Google groups.
> >
> > I can definitely make others admins. Just join up and let me know if you
> want to admin.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:34 AM Wes McKinney <wesmckinn at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Is it managed by Google groups or is it mailman or Pony Mail? Can you
> >> make some of us admins?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 10:53 AM Andy Ray Terrel <andy.terrel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 12:07 PM Andy Ray Terrel <
> andy.terrel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 11:28 AM Wes McKinney <wesmckinn at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> As a discussion list intended for project developers, I am not
> >> >>> anticipating so much noise that people become disengaged. If we were
> >> >>> creating a forum to collect user feedback, that would be a little
> bit
> >> >>> different. I'm more looking to encourage the sharing of more high
> >> >>> level project planning, roadmaps and goals, fund raising activities,
> >> >>> and other matters related to the health and growth of the major
> >> >>> community projects. It would be really useful for each project to
> >> >>> state a list of goals for some future horizon (e.g. 1 year).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I have observed that some of these cross-project discussions often
> >> >>> only happen in person, or on an ad hoc basis on GitHub issues.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> User feedback can be helpful, but in practice most projects function
> >> >>> as "do-ocracies" where opinions are roughly valued proportional to
> >> >>> project contributions.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It would also be useful to be able to point users to historical
> >> >>> discussions amongst project developers when there are questions or
> >> >>> concerns. My anecdotal experience is that the lack of visible /
> >> >>> centralized cross-project discussions and roadmapping / planning /
> >> >>> goal discussion has at times led to user (or developer) confusion
> >> >>> about what different groups of developers are trying to accomplish.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The concerns raised seem to be mostly about optimizing large-scale
> >> >>> communications. Let's first see if there is communication that needs
> >> >>> to be optimized. Even if we add additional tools to facilitate
> >> >>> communications, I think we still need a mailing list.
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> Have we decided which mailing list we desire? I forgot we could also
> just make it dev at pydata.org if we like. In general I think, we should
> write up a governance document on pydata as a whole.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I've created a list dev at pydata.org if we want to use it.
> >> >
> >> > On the governance front, Leah is putting together a plan around
> managing pydata conferences going. We also wanted to revamp pydata.org to
> reflect more of the development community around the ecosystem so
> definitely send ideas and thoughts.
> >> >
> >> > -- Andy
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> - Andy
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> - Wes
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 4:58 PM Matthew Rocklin <mrocklin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > > I don't see what is wrong with using e-mail.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > There were some issues raised before:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I'm slightly concerned that a broad ranging e-mail list that
> encompasses all of PyData would get noisy.  For example I can imagine
> lengthy conversations on visualization or probabalistic programming that,
> while I find important, would likely want to take a pass on.  Having a
> service that includes tags and subscription to those tags may have value.
> >> >>> > E-mail list archives tend to collect dust.  If we're doing
> long-range cross-project coordination then those conversations might have
> long term value.  We might want to cross reference them, upvote them,
> subscribe to them, and so on.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > And also some benefits of discourse raised by Nathaniel which
> might be turned around to be interpreted as concerns with e-mail.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > My impression so far is that discourse takes a bit of adjustment
> >> >>> > compared to mailing lists, but it has a lot of valuable features
> like
> >> >>> > multi-quoting, markdown (code blocks, links, ...), solid
> moderation
> >> >>> > tools (e.g. if a discussion diverges you can retroactively split
> parts
> >> >>> > of it out into a new topic), polls (these were incredibly useful
> for
> >> >>> > taking the temperature of the community during the governance
> >> >>> > discussions), ability to reply to messages that were posted
> before you
> >> >>> > joined the list, configurable notifications (email me everything /
> >> >>> > email me when a new topic is created / email me a summary weekly /
> >> >>> > ...), ...
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > > It is public, archival, and append-only. GitHub issues are
> non-archival and comments can be edited or deleted.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > That's certainly true of GitHub issues.  I suspect that it's also
> true of Discourse (though I'd have to go through the docs to make sure that
> it wasn't possible to turn it off).  From my perspective the (in)ability to
> edit or delete comments isn't a big deal.  I'm not particularly concerned
> with people modifying history in a nefarious way.  Though perhaps my
> viewpoint here is naive.  I haven't yet run into this issue in our
> community.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I think that the biggest benefit to using an e-mail list is that
> it's a well known technology with a low barrier to adoption.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I anticipate two likely failure modes for e-mail and discourse
> respectively:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > EMail: conversation is too diffuse so that people sign up, get
> bored listening to things that don't interest them, and then stop
> notifications.  The pydata mailing list ends up being used by small subsets
> of the community, but not the community as a whole.
> >> >>> > Discourse: it's too new/unknown so that no one signs up and it
> doesn't reach critical mass.  (this seems to be happening with Jupyter's
> discourse today?)
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > There are lots of other pros and cons to each, obviously, but
> those two outcomes are, I think, the most troublesome.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 8:13 AM Wes McKinney <wesmckinn at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Having dev.pydata.org sounds fine to me.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> I don't see what is wrong with using e-mail. It is public,
> archival,
> >> >>> >> and append-only. GitHub issues are non-archival and comments can
> be
> >> >>> >> edited or deleted.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 6:26 AM Andy Ray Terrel <
> andy.terrel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > I would recommend we set up a site dev.pydata.org that tells
> the folks where conversations are happening. While mailing lists are great
> we might consider just having a github issue tracker set up for cross
> ecosystem bugs or initiatives. I was planning on decommisionning the
> numfocus discourse and zulip server as they didn't really have great use.
> Chris Holdgraf suggested using Topic Box, but user based pricing isn't a
> great option for open source development.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > Anywho, both dask and pandas are part of the NumFOCUS projects
> ecosystem so I'm happy to set anything up for ya'll.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > -- Andy
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 10:35 PM Wes McKinney <
> wesmckinn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> @Andy
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> pydata at googlegroups.com has 2734 members. Based on recent
> traffic it
> >> >>> >> >> is really a user / Q&A mailing list, not a place for the
> >> >>> >> >> maintainers/steering committees of major projects to speak
> publicly
> >> >>> >> >> with one another (where discussions are public, archived,
> searchable).
> >> >>> >> >> I have observed that there are many discussions happening
> between the
> >> >>> >> >> developers of projects on an ad hoc basis and on ad hoc
> communication
> >> >>> >> >> channels (both private and public). Partly there is no
> obvious place
> >> >>> >> >> for, e.g., the developers of pandas and dask to have a public
> >> >>> >> >> discussion, that is not necessarily "partisan" to one of those
> >> >>> >> >> projects.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> As another example issue, there is not an obvious place to
> raise
> >> >>> >> >> issues. Back in the day I think numpy-discussion or
> scipy-user used to
> >> >>> >> >> partly serve this purpose, but the centers of gravity have
> shifted.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> - Wes
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 9:41 PM Andy Ray Terrel <
> andy.terrel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > I'm not completely clear what is being asked for since
> pydata at googlegroups.com already exists. Since NumFOCUS is promoting the
> PyData conference and helping build the brand for the ecosystem, I wonder
> if a home like pydata-dev at numfocus.org would be interesting for folks?
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > It is also my understanding that there will be a fuller
> steering committee set up for the conferences next year. I propose we do
> the same for the technical structure. As is, I manage the website and
> github repos but there is not much dictating how I manage these.
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > -- Andy
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 6:00 PM Nathaniel Smith <
> njs at pobox.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> Other examples of discourse used for dev discussion
> include:
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> - https://internals.rust-lang.org/ -- main dev forum for
> rust
> >> >>> >> >> >> - https://discuss.python.org/ -- potential replacement for
> >> >>> >> >> >> python-{committers,dev,users}, still experimental but
> where a ton of
> >> >>> >> >> >> the python governance discussion happened
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> My impression so far is that discourse takes a bit of
> adjustment
> >> >>> >> >> >> compared to mailing lists, but it has a lot of valuable
> features like
> >> >>> >> >> >> multi-quoting, markdown (code blocks, links, ...), solid
> moderation
> >> >>> >> >> >> tools (e.g. if a discussion diverges you can retroactively
> split parts
> >> >>> >> >> >> of it out into a new topic), polls (these were incredibly
> useful for
> >> >>> >> >> >> taking the temperature of the community during the
> governance
> >> >>> >> >> >> discussions), ability to reply to messages that were
> posted before you
> >> >>> >> >> >> joined the list, configurable notifications (email me
> everything /
> >> >>> >> >> >> email me when a new topic is created / email me a summary
> weekly /
> >> >>> >> >> >> ...), ...
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> -n
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Matthew Rocklin <
> mrocklin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Copying the mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Whoops!  E-mail fail on my part.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Discourse is interesting. It seems to be used (at
> least in PyTorch's
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> case) as more of a modern message board for users than
> a place for
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> long-form discussions between project developers.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> IMHO having a cross-project developer mailing list is
> probably overdue
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> -- I think we can do a better job the next couple of
> years
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> coordinating (colluding?) with each other. A lot of
> coordination does
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> of course in private, project-level, or other ad-hoc
> basis. It would
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> help to be able to discuss ecosystem-level problems
> and possible
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> solutions.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Entirely agreed.  And I think that an e-mail list is the
> obvious first choice here.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > I'm bringing up discourse as an alternative for
> consideration.  This is for a couple reasons:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > I'm slightly concerned that a broad ranging e-mail list
> that encompasses all of PyData would get noisy.  For example I can imagine
> lengthy conversations on visualization or probabalistic programming that,
> while I find important, would likely want to take a pass on.  Having a
> service that includes tags and subscription to those tags may have value.
> >> >>> >> >> >> > E-mail list archives tend to collect dust.  If we're
> doing long-range cross-project coordination then those conversations might
> have long term value.  We might want to cross reference them, upvote them,
> subscribe to them, and so on.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > In regards to PyTorch's discuss in particular I agree
> that it is used more as a user forum, which I agree is a different use case
> than what Wes is proposing here.  I mostly pointed to it so that people
> could get a sense of what an active system looks like.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Regardless, I encourage this conversation to happen with
> a broader set of people.  I believe that other groups are considering these
> topics as well and may have thoughts beyond those that have been expressed
> here.  I'm not sure how best to bootstrap this process, other than an
> e-mail to maybe the NumFOCUS mailing list and perhaps a tweet?
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > > There's both a NumFOCUS discourse and zulip, I
> believe, but neither is particularly active. Whether those should be
> considered possible starting points or cautionary tales I leave to y'all.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Yeah, I should also amend my previous statement from
> "how about discourse?" to "is there anything more appropriate than an
> e-mail list?".  Discourse is the service around which I've seen the most
> activity recently but I agree that in our community, it hasn't really taken
> off that well.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > And just to reiterate, I think that an e-mail list would
> be great.  Just wanted to throw out some other thoughts.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Best,
> >> >>> >> >> >> > -matt
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> > On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 8:47 AM Wes McKinney <
> wesmckinn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> I sent a request to postmaster @ python.o to create
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> pydata-dev at python.org. We can also use google
> groups if others prefer
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> that
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 3:59 PM Joris Van den
> Bossche
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> <jorisvandenbossche at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> > Giving the growing ecosysten of data tools (in
> some way related to pandas, but not pandas itself), I am also +1 on such a
> list. I think that would be welcome, and not aware of anything existing.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> > Joris
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> > Op di 25 dec. 2018 02:19 schreef Stephan Hoyer <
> shoyer at gmail.com:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> +1 for pydata-dev
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> I don't think there's a list quite like this
> today.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 6:11 PM Wes McKinney <
> wesmckinn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> I'm talking about public archived communication
> channels
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> On Mon, Dec 24, 2018, 7:57 PM William Ayd <
> william.ayd at icloud.com wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> What do you think is missing from the existing
> PyData conferences? I’ve only been to the one in LA but it seemed to be
> somewhat in the direction of what you are asking for.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > On Dec 24, 2018, at 3:02 PM, Wes McKinney <
> wesmckinn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > hi folks,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > Prompted by some recent discussions I
> wondered what you all think
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > would be the best venue to have public
> discussions that involve other
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > open source projects that are generally 1
> degree of separation away
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > from pandas. Sort of like "pydata-dev", or
> something. Is there
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > something like this already that I just
> missed?
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > As context, I'm trying to travel less and go
> to fewer conferences the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > next couple of years, and spend more time
> coding and writing, but I
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > still want to talk with people
> (asynchronously) about things, and
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > preferably in public.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > - Wes
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> >
> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > Pandas-dev mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> > Pandas-dev at python.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> >
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> Pandas-dev mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> Pandas-dev at python.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>>
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> Pandas-dev mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> Pandas-dev at python.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >>
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> Pandas-dev mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> Pandas-dev at python.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Pandas-dev mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Pandas-dev at python.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Pandas-dev mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Pandas-dev at python.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> --
> >> >>> >> >> >> Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> Pandas-dev mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> Pandas-dev at python.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> > Pandas-dev mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> > Pandas-dev at python.org
> >> >>> >> >> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev
> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> Pandas-dev mailing list
> >> >>> >> Pandas-dev at python.org
> >> >>> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/pandas-dev/attachments/20190103/adf5156a/attachment-0001.html>