[Scipy-organizers] Publication and review in SciPy

[Andy Ray Terrel]

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:28 AM, sheila miguez <sheila at codersquid.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Jacob Barhak <jacob.barhak at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Sheila,
>>
>> Since you are the major contributor to this thread and have contacts to
>> volunteers, I will assume that you are leading this effort and I will try to
>> form a core consensus with you.
>
> Stefan van der Walt is leading proceedings, and I'm interested in
> being a volunteer to help. I spoke up a lot because I'm also a
> technical co-chair and would like to help with the tools people will
> use for doing proceedings stuff. I hope I didn't derail the topic by
> participating too much; I apologize.

Sheila, we are an open community and don't have any issue with you
responding.  The only way things get done at the SciPy conferences is
folks take initiative and do them.  Your thoughts and initiative here
is really appreciated.  I expect the only reason many others aren't
chiming in is they are too busy to commit to anything.

>
> For working out consensus. I like how another project I'm in has
> guidelines for consensus. I'll share that group's guidelines when we
> have the doc available somewhere other than googledocs. I'd like to
> suggest using them with any working group I'm running or on.
>

Please share.  As is the consensus decider is basically Kelsey and me,
but right now I don't see anything actionable items from this thread.

>> I also suggest that to speed this planning process and also communicate by
>> phone/video conference. I would first like to ask who will be interested to
>> be a party in such a remote conference? Interested people, please respond to
>> this thread. I suggest we see who responds in a week or so and try to figure
>> out best communication method and time.
>
> I agree a meeting soon would be good.
>
>
> --
> sheila at codersquid.com