On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:33 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote: >> 1) I very much agree that governance can make or break a project. However, >> the actual governance approach often ends up making less difference than the >> people involved. >> >> 2) While the FreeBSD and XFree examples do point to some real problems with >> the "core" model it seems that there are many other projects that are using >> it quite successfully.
I was just rereading the complaints about the 'core' structure from high-level NetBSD project leaders: "[the "core" and "board of directors"] teams are dysfunctional because they do not provide leadership: all they do is act reactively to requests from users and/or to resolve internal disputes. In other words: there is no initiative nor vision emerging from these teams (and, for that matter, from anybody)." [1] "There is no high-level direction; if you ask "what about the problems with threads" or "will there be a flash-friendly file system", the best you'll get is "we'd love to have both" -- but no work is done to recruit people to code these things, or encourage existing developers to work on them." [2] I imagine we will have to reconcile ourselves to similar problems, if we adopt the same structures. Cheers, Matthew [1] http://julipedia.meroh.net/2013/06/self-interview-after-leaving-netbsd.html [2] http://mail-index.netbsd.org/netbsd-users/2006/08/30/0016.html _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
