[yt-dev] let's talk about Governance

[Matthew Turk]

Hey Britton,

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm very in favor of putting some official procedures into a YTEP.  Having a
> codified process may also help with conflict resolution as well.

Agreed.  This should definitely be a YTEP.

>
> Apache does something with their projects where developers who make
> sustained contribution are made "members" after nomination by another member
> and are given write access to the main repo.  It's a small thing, but if we
> perhaps have an official definition of "yt member" in a YTEP with a posted
> list of members, it can be something people can point to as a way of
> demonstrating that they've done significant work on the project.

I really like this.  I've seen other projects use "badges" as a way to
indicate this as well.  But I really like the idea of members.  We
should do this.

>
> I think it might also be good to have officer-like positions where people
> are representatives for various areas of the code, such as data structures,
> visualization, analysis_modules, etc. and to have semi-regular meeting of
> these people.  This may be as much leadership as we need for now, just a
> group that meets on a schedule to make sure everyone's on the same page with
> releases and major development efforts.

Yes!  We absolutely need this.

So for sure, I would think we need some type of "membership" and some
type of "officer" structure.  Does that sound right to others?

>
> What do people think of something like this?
>
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Britton,
>>
>> Thanks for bringing this up -- it's a tough topic, but also I think
>> really important.  At the WSSSPE conference last year, a paper was
>> submitted talking about the Apache model:
>>
>>
>> http://figshare.com/articles/Sustainable_Cyberinfrastructure_Software_Through_Open_Governance/790761
>>
>> which talks about a lot of related topics.  Apache does some
>> interesting things.  They use the word "meritocracy" which I am rather
>> -1 on using (see, for instance,
>>
>> http://www.ashedryden.com/blog/the-ethics-of-unpaid-labor-and-the-oss-community
>> ) but I do think there is something to be said for a large part of
>> their methods of organization.
>>
>> Like you, I think we are overdue.  I would like to point out that, for
>> all intents and purposes, you are *already* the ombudsman for the yt
>> community.  I don't think you're proposing we have a committee that
>> bosses everyone around, but rather one that enables a larger number of
>> people to have a say, particularly because yt has become embedded in
>> many of our scientific workflows and it touches a lot of research
>> activities now.  I like the idea of members.  I like the idea of a
>> project management committee, but it's not clear to me how that would
>> work, or which decisions we have made recently that they would weigh
>> in on.  I also really like the idea of having "code liasons" to
>> different data platforms and/or communities, and the idea of having
>> people who are responsible for many different areas of the code and
>> codifying that in some way is quite attractive to me.
>>
>> For what it's worth, a few weeks ago I gave a presentation on my
>> "vision" for the future of yt (http://goo.gl/JKt6MA).  The thing is,
>> while I gave this presentation, it's just *my* vision -- it is not
>> necessarily anyone else's vision.  And I think it's time we have some
>> method of taking into account a diverse set of opinions for what we as
>> a community can emphasize, how we resolve conflicts, and so on and so
>> forth.
>>
>> Again, thanks for bringing this up.  We need to have this conversation.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Greeting yt developers,
>> >
>> > First, I want to congratulate everyone here on the successful release
>> > of yt-3.0.  This was a massive effort on the part of so many and a
>> > true testament to the strength of this team.
>> >
>> > At the time of writing this, there are 78 members of the yt-dev
>> > mailing list.  As someone who does most of their work in very small
>> > collaborations, this amazes me and make me very proud.  In case you're
>> > wondering, the yt-users list has 268 members.
>> >
>> > As a project, yt has a significant amount of infrastructure: code
>> > review with pull requests, issue tracking, automated testing, emails
>> > lists, an IRC channel, enhancement proposals, workshops.  All of this
>> > is evidence of our legitimacy as a Real Thing.  However, one big
>> > missing piece is a system of governance.  I don't know exactly what
>> > this means, but I have some ideas, which I will share below.  What I
>> > want to do right now is to start a discussion that will, hopefully,
>> > include as many people as possible on this list.
>> >
>> > For me, governance means (roughly) the following:
>> >
>> > - a set of procedures in writing for how various things are to be
>> >   done, such as acceptance of pull requests, releases, designating
>> >   developers as core contributors, etc.
>> >
>> > - a governing body to make decisions and help guide the project.
>> >
>> > This accomplishes a number of things, which as a project I think we
>> > need, such as:
>> >
>> > - overall stability of the project.
>> >
>> > - providing a system for conflict resolution.
>> >
>> > - maintaining the spirit of yt as a team effort.
>> >
>> > - providing a way for active contributors to get credit for their
>> >   contribution in the form of official recognition.
>> >
>> >
>> > So, these are my initial thoughts, but I really think this deserves a
>> > thorough discussion with as many people participating as possible.
>> > Please, think about what governance means to you, whether we need it,
>> > what it should be, and what we might get out of it, and share your
>> > thoughts over the next few days.  I look forward to this discussion.
>> >
>> > Britton
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > yt-dev mailing list
>> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> yt-dev mailing list
>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>