[Numpy-discussion] grant proposal for core scientific Python projects (rejected)
waterbug at pangalactic.us
Thu May 2 21:48:51 EDT 2019
P.S. If anyone wants to continue this discussion at SciPy 2019,
I will be there (on my own nickel! ;) ...
On 5/2/19 9:45 PM, Stephen Waterbury wrote:
> I am a NASA pythonista (for 20+ years ;), but you can now say you know
> yet another person at NASA who has no idea this even exists ... :)
> Not only do I not know of that, but I know of NASA policies that make
> it very difficult for NASA civil servants to contribute to open source
> projects -- quite hypocritical, given the amount of open source
> code that NASA (like all other large organizations) depends critically
> on, but it's a fact.
> Steve Waterbury
> (CLEARLY **NOT** SPEAKING IN ANY OFFICIAL CAPACITY FOR NASA OR
> THE U.S. GOVERNMENT AS A WHOLE! Hence the personal email
> address. :)
> On 5/2/19 9:31 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote:
>> Sounds like this is a NASA specific thing, in which case, I guess
>> someone at NASA would need to step up.
>> I’m afraid I know no pythonistas at NASA.
>> But I’ll poke around NOAA to see if there’s anything similar.
>> On Apr 25, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com
>> <mailto:ralf.gommers at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 12:41 PM Ralf Gommers
>>> <ralf.gommers at gmail.com <mailto:ralf.gommers at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:03 PM Joe Harrington
>>> <jh at physics.ucf.edu <mailto:jh at physics.ucf.edu>> wrote:
>>> 3. There's such a thing as a share-in-savings contract at
>>> NASA, in which
>>> you calculate a savings, such as from avoided costs of
>>> licensing IDL or
>>> Matlab, and say you'll develop a replacement for that
>>> product that costs
>>> less, in exchange for a portion of the savings. These are
>>> rare and few
>>> people know about them, but one presenter to the committee
>>> did discuss
>>> them and thought they'd be appropriate. I've always felt
>>> that we could
>>> get a chunk of change this way, and was surprised to find
>>> that the
>>> approach exists and has a name. About 3 of 4 people I talk
>>> to at NASA
>>> have no idea this even exists, though, and I haven't pursued
>>> it to its
>>> logical end to see if it's viable.
>>> I've heard of these. Definitely worth looking into.
>>> It seems to be hard to find any information about these
>>> share-in-savings contracts. The closest thing I found is this:
>>> It is called "Shared Savings" there, and was replaced last year by
>>> something called "Value Engineering Change Proposal". If anyone can
>>> comment on whether that's the same thing as Joe meant and whether
>>> this is worth following up on, that would be very helpful.
>>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
>>> NumPy-Discussion at python.org <mailto:NumPy-Discussion at python.org>
>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
>> NumPy-Discussion at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion