[SciPy-Dev] SciPy governance model

[Ralf Gommers]

On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 8:15 AM, Pauli Virtanen <pav at iki.fi> wrote:

Interesting discussion so far!


>
> Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:03:43 -0800, Matthew Brett kirjoitti:
> [clip]
> > What do you think about the idea of having regular state-of-scipy
> > reviews to make sure we're conscious about keeping on track, assessing
> > risks, improving process?
>
> For the technical aspect, this sounds something like the Scipy roadmap
> (https://github.com/scipy/scipy/blob/master/doc/ROADMAP.rst.txt), and the
> discussion leading to it, in conferences and online in public.
>
> Something like regular prompts for discussion of technical and
> organisation roadmap could be useful. At minimum, this could be simply a
> (bi-?)yearly post on the mailing list, to remind to update the roadmap
> and to summarize / bring up / discuss any relevant organisation updates /
> issues in the preceding period.
>

I quite like this idea. Documents like a roadmap can easily go out of date
if they're not actively maintained. Having a critical look at it once or
twice a year will be helpful. Also +1 for adding some organizational items
to it (I'm thinking CoC, FSA, etc. should have been on there).

The list of people on the steering committee also needs to be updated with
this kind of frequency.

How about doing this around 1 January and 1 July every year?

I'm not sensing a lot of enthusiasm for the fixed-term/election idea, so
I'd gently suggest to not go down that path but instead look at the regular
review above as an opportunity to bring up concerns regarding any aspect of
our organisational structure (we can put in wording like that, PR welcome
I'd say).

Cheers,
Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/scipy-dev/attachments/20170116/37b7e9d5/attachment.html>