Hi, > Majorities don't make numpy development decisions normally. Never > have. Not of the mailing list membership nor of the steering > committee. Implementors do. When implementors disagree strongly and do > not reach a consensus, then we fall back to majorities. But as I said > before, majority voting requires conscientious control over the voting > membership or it isn't majority voting. The process that you > identified as being remarkably good at maintaining shared ownership > and responsibility isn't majority rule, but consensus among > implementors. We just don't have that right now, but we need to get > stuff done anyways.
I think that's right, in general, but in this case, the primary disagreement was between David C+Chuck, and Travis, and there has been a large weight of the contributions to the list in favor of David's view. Now, you might say, I don't care about the weight of contributions because the people mailing don't implement, but that obviously has a social cost. All important arguments are resolved now, we've withdrawn the binary, agreed to a next ABI breaking release, and David's happy with 1.5 as a number, so I don't think we have to worry that discussion will delay getting stuff done at this point, See you, Matthew _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
