[Numpy-discussion] What is consensus anyway

[Travis Oliphant]

On Apr 24, 2012, at 5:52 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Charles R Harris
> <charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 2012/4/24 Stéfan van der Walt <stefan at sun.ac.za>
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Charles R Harris
>>> <charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The advantage of nans, I suppose, is that they are in the hardware and
>>>> so
>>> 
>>> Why are we having a discussion on NAN's in a thread on consensus?
>>> This is a strong indicator of the problem we're facing.
>>> 
>> 
>> We seem to have a consensus regarding interest in the topic.
> 
> This email is mainly to Travis.
> 
> This thread seems to be dying, condemning us to keep repeating the
> same conversation with no result.
> 
> Chuck has made it clear he is not interested in this conversation.
> Until it is clear you are interested in this conversation, it will
> keep dying.   As you know, I think that will be very bad for numpy,
> and, as you know, I care a great deal about that.

I am interested in the conversation, but I think I've already stated my views as well as I know how.   I'm not sure what else I should do at this point.    We do need consensus (defined as the absence of serious objectors) for me to agree to a NumPy 1.X release.  

I don't think it helps us get to a consensus to further discuss non-technical issues at this point. 

There is much interest in ideas for finding common ground in the masked array situation, but that should happen on another thread.

-Travis