8000 PDEP-1 Revision (Decision Making) by noatamir · Pull Request #53576 · pandas-dev/pandas · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content

PDEP-1 Revision (Decision Making) #53576

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 19 commits into from
Apr 1, 2024
Merged

PDEP-1 Revision (Decision Making) #53576

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
19 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
a9c499d
adding voting draft
noatamir May 3, 2023
233c03e
new workflow intro
noatamir May 3, 2023
45c95fc
update after feedback
noatamir May 10, 2023
0133e82
fix errors
noatamir May 10, 2023
4ad9f80
fix errors
noatamir May 10, 2023
8108b43
Merge branch 'pandas-dev:main' into pdep_voting_wip
noatamir Jun 9, 2023
2b3c5ad
Apply suggestions from code review
noatamir Jun 9, 2023
9092668
clarification
noatamir Jun 14, 2023
a737034
updated based on feedback
noatamir Jun 16, 2023
a59e759
updated based on feedback
noatamir Jun 16, 2023
48b3300
typo
noatamir Jun 16, 2023
32fce5e
Updated following Simon's feedback
noatamir Jul 9, 2023
0530d29
Apply suggestions from code review
jorisvandenbossche Feb 23, 2024
288e005
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into pdep_voting_wip
jorisvandenbossche Feb 23, 2024
809ae6f
change majority to 70%
jorisvandenbossche Feb 23, 2024
d5a1869
some small formatting changes
jorisvandenbossche Feb 23, 2024
88a7db9
reword case of early vote
jorisvandenbossche Feb 23, 2024
97ba480
use Irv's suggestion to reword notifications
jorisvandenbossche Mar 5, 2024
e18db08
add withdrawn status
jorisvandenbossche Mar 6, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Prev Previous commit
Next Next commit
fix errors
  • Loading branch information
@noatamir
noatamir committed May 10, 2023
commit 4ad9f80216745dc92364cc33f5fe71f2c07e45ab
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions web/pandas/pdeps/0001-purpose-and-guidelines.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ for the expected format.

The initial status of a PDEP will be `Status: Draft`. This will be changed to
`Status: Under discussion` by the author(s), when they are ready to proceed with the decision
making process.
making process.

#### PDEP Discussion Timeline

Expand All @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ As the voting period starts, a VOTE issue is created which links to the PDEP dis
Each voting member may cast a vote by adding one of the following comments:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Apologies if I havce missed this but it does appear that a "voting member" is explicitly defined?

The removed section seems to suggest that a voting member is anyone in the "core development team". Does pandas have any segregation between "active" and "inactive" core development members and does this have any bearing on their right to vote?

Is there any scope to specifically invite certain informed (non-core dev) parties to vote on issues? I would probably consider this an abuse of power and instead invite to participate in the discussion to influence members.

If votes are cast by core dev members does this have implications for inviting future members into the core dev team? i.e to not push for adding members of a group of similar, or friendly like minded individuals, perhaps from the same institution etc, that can build up substantial iunfluence?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There's a bit of a chicken and egg issue here. We are planning on updating other governance documents to define who can vote. Right now, it is the core team, but it is likely we will not use that in the future.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Right now, it is the core team, but it is likely we will not use that in the future.

IMO we should also require a discussion to change this, hence my comment to define voting member in this PDEP now.


- +1: approve.
- 0: abstain.
- 0: abstain.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we want to add a small explanation of how we understand "abstaining" or what it could mean?
Something like "Not fully convinced, but don't want to block it", or better worded (although there might be many reasons to vote +0, like "I haven't closely followed, but trust the majority")

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Isn't that the one sentence reason thing on the next line?
Formally, it is anyone who wants the vote to proceed (achieve quorum), but not interested in voting for or against it. But that's kind of the dictionary definition almost no?!

- Reason: A one sentence reason is required.
- -1: disapprove
- Reason: A one sentence reason is required.
Expand Down
0