[python-committers] An alternative governance model

[Ned Deily]

On Jul 17, 2018, at 22:15, Eric V. Smith <eric at trueblade.com> wrote:
> On 7/17/2018 10:02 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> I’d like to propose an alternative model, and with it a succession plan, that IMHO hasn’t gotten enough discussion.  It’s fairly radical in that it proposes to not actually change that much!
>> TL;DR: I propose keeping a singular BDFL and adding a Council of Advisors that helps the BDFL in various capacities, with additional responsibilities.  I also have someone specific in mind for the NBDFL, but you’ll have to read on for the big reveal.
> I've come to this same conclusion. I think Brett would be a good choice, and I'd support him, but I think the more important part is that it be a single person.

+100.  I think Python owes much of its success to both Guido's ongoing vision *and* his clear role as leader.  Up to now, we have not had much experience governing by committee or council and I think it may be a mistake to try to implement that now (although we *do* have some successful experience with informal council of advisors models, for instance, in the release management area).  While it wouldn't necessarily be a good choice for many (most?) open-source projects, I think the NBDFL-plus-advisors model would work well in the relatively congenial and respectful environment of the current Python committers community.  That's not to say that we won't collectively decide down the road that we want to try something different but trying to keep this really important transition (i.e. from Guido) as simple as possible initially would be a really smart thing to do. 

> And I think the succession plan is important, too. I think Łukasz was alluding to this earlier (or maybe I'm projecting): who's to say that the next BDFL is legitimate? If we put together a plan, and Guido blesses it, that makes the plan legitimate, and then the plan gets executed and makes NBDFL legitimate.

That, too.

--
  Ned Deily
  nad at python.org -- []