Great points. My initial suggestion of 5-11 was more about current board size rather than trying to fix it.
I agree that having someone represent from major downstream projects would be a great thing. -Travis On Dec 4, 2011, at 7:16 AM, Alan G Isaac wrote: > On 12/4/2011 1:43 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: >> I don't think there are 5 active developers, let alone 11. >> With hard work you might scrape together two or three. >> Having 5 or 11 people making decisions for the two or >> three actually doing the work isn't going to go over well. > > Very true! But you might consider including on any board > a developer or two from important projects that are very > NumPy dependent. (E.g., Matplotlib.) > > One other thing: how about starting with a "board" of 3 > and a rule that says any active developer can request to > join, that additions are determined by majority vote of > the existing board, and that having the board both small > and odd numbered is a priority? (Fixing the board size > in advance for a project we all hope will grow substantially > seems odd.) > > fwiw, > Alan Isaac > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion --- Travis Oliphant Enthought, Inc. [email protected] 1-512-536-1057 http://www.enthought.com _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
