On 14 January 2024 23:21:51 GMT, Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
>On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 1:50:04 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>PS. The question whether an attempt to sneak the NumFocus application
>through the back door without a proper community consultation is a
>violation of our CoC is
On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 1:50:04 PM UTC-8 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
PS. The question whether an attempt to sneak the NumFocus application
through the back door without a proper community consultation is a
violation of our CoC is left as a homework for the readers.
Thanks for sharing this exe
I already pointed out that our project will certainly benefit from being more
like successful Python systems, e.g. how they don't vendor compilers and a good
portion of PyPI packages.
CoCs are a nice cherry on the tart, yes.
PS. The question whether an attempt to sneak the NumFocus application
On Sunday, January 14, 2024 at 9:07:07 AM UTC-8 David Roe wrote:
Is there any reason for the quick turnaround time?
Yes, it is motivated by the current crisis of abuse and misconduct in the
community.
Our project will benefit from engaging closely with projects and
organizations that have work
I agree with Dima that 2 days is not enough time to gather feedback. Is
there any reason for the quick turnaround time?
David
P.S. I'm sorry about disappearing from the other thread about disputed
PRs. I will try to summarize the discussion on that thread and call for a
vote shortly.
On Sat, Jan
The time scale is too tight for people who don't work on weekends (or don't
work on Sage 5 days a week) to react, this is the main objection.
I think this needs more discussion, more detailed than just TBD, TBD proposal,
and can wait for the next round, on April 15.
There are a number of things
