On Feb 16, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Jason Grout wrote: > On 2/15/12 6:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: >> But in the very end, when agreement can't >> be reached by other means, the developers are the one making the calls. >> (This is simply a consequence that they are the only ones who can >> credibly threaten to fork the project.) > > Interesting point. I hope I'm not pitching a log onto the fire here, > but in numpy's case, there are very many capable developers on other > projects who depend on numpy who could credibly threaten a fork if they > felt numpy was drastically going wrong.
Jason, that there capable developers out there that are able to fork NumPy (or any other project you can realize) is a given. The point Dag was signaling is that this threaten is more probable to happen *inside* the community. And you pointed out an important aspect too by saying "if they felt numpy was drastically going wrong". It makes me the impression that some people is very frightened about something really bad would happen, well before it happens. While I agree that this is *possible*, I'd also advocate to give Travis the benefit of doubt. I'm convinced he (and Continuum as a whole) is making things happen that will benefit the entire NumPy community; but in case something gets really wrong and catastrophic, it is always a relief to know that things can be reverted in the pure open source tradition (by either doing a fork, creating a new foundation, or even better, proposing a new way to do things). What it does not sound reasonable to me is to allow fear to block Continuum efforts for making a better NumPy. I think it is better to relax a bit, see how things are going, and then judge by looking at the *results*. My two cents, Disclaimer: As my e-mail address makes clear, I'm a Continuum guy. -- Francesc Alted _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
