[Numpy-discussion] Governance model request

[Bryan Van de Ven]

> On Sep 21, 2015, at 9:42 PM, David Cournapeau <cournape at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Bryan Van de Ven <bryanv at continuum.io> wrote:
> 
> > On Sep 21, 2015, at 9:24 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The second problem is that you have a potential conflict of interest,
> > in that it is possible for the needs of Continuum to conflict with the
> > needs of numpy.   I believe, from previous emails on this list, that
> > you don't think that is very important, but I continue to disagree
> > about that.   For example, see this interview with Linus Torvalds,
> 
> Can you actually spell out some particular, articulable, concrete points of concern? Otherwise this just seems like idle, non-constructive speculation (at best).
> 
> There is ample history of such things happening in OSS history, so I think that's a fair concern, even if that has not happened for numpy yet.

Specific examples to support that claim would be appreciated. In particular, examples where an OSS project was corrupted (is that the word?) by a company specifically at the hand of the project's original creator would be especially relevant. 

Beyond that, what (even in a broad sense) is an example of a goal that "Continuum might need" that would conceivably do detriment to the NumPy community? That it be faster? Simpler to maintain? Easier to extend? Integrate better with more OS projects? Attract new active developers? Receive more financial support? Grow its user base even more?

And then, even if there is some sliver of daylight to be uncovered between Travis and the community, what is the current organizational mechanism by which a problematic contribution is forced into NumPy against the will of all other core developers?

Finally, is there any previous instance whatsoever that can be pointed to of Travis forcing some change into NumPy contrary to the interest of the community? If not, what actual basis is there to exclude him from a steering committee?

I obviously have a point of view; but my opinion here is my own, which is: this sort of pre-emptive impugning of someone's integrity is speculation upon speculation upon speculation 

Bryan