Open NickleDave opened 2 years ago
See also this Turing Way chapter: https://deploy-preview-1858--the-turing-way.netlify.app/collaboration/shared-ownership.html
as suggested here: https://twitter.com/MalvikaSharan/status/1407728640255725576
How (not) to design and implement a large-scale, interdisciplinary research infrastructure
https://academic.oup.com/spp/article-abstract/47/6/818/6044344?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false
success story: https://link-springer-com.proxy.library.emory.edu/article/10.1057/biosoc.2013.23
both this and the how not to from https://twitter.com/beckettws/status/1407754490011213825
Some models, from this issue: https://github.com/pyscript/governance/issues/2#issuecomment-1114225699
So I wonder - is the goal to move towards a collective governing model? If so, what kinds of commitments is Anaconda making to ensure that this happens? What is the end-state of this next phase of governance transformation? Does it look like a multi-stakeholder entity like the PSF, Apache, etc, or more like a "one main stakeholder that allows others to come to its table" project like Tensorflow? What kinds of oversight will it have to ensure that the project moves forward in-line with its mission and governing principles? Does Anaconda intend to move ownership over marks/licenses/etc into a neutral organization like NumFocus?
https://peps.python.org/pep-8012/ https://www.python.org/psf/bylaws/
https://www.apache.org/foundation/governance/
https://github.com/tensorflow/community/blob/master/governance/code-and-collaboration.md
See also, sklearn's model:
https://scikit-learn.org/stable/governance.html#decision-making-process
bootstrap model for Executable Books, includes model for enhancement proposals https://github.com/executablebooks/meta/pull/843#issuecomment-1274905385
dask is one model: https://github.com/dask/governance
as suggested here: https://twitter.com/jcristharif/status/1404841031129092097