►
From YouTube: SimPEG Governance Discussion Dec 3, 2020
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
All
right
we'll
hit
record
perfect
okay,
so
what
I
think
for
today
I
guess
like
first,
maybe
just
a
bit
of
discussion
on
like
goals
and
what
we
hope
to
achieve.
So
I
don't
expect
us
to
like
solve
simple
governance
in
the
next
hour.
This
is
much
more
meant
to
like
kick
off
the
conversation
and
see
if
we're
kind
of
on
the
on
the
right
page
or
on
the
same
page
structure.
A
I
haven't
thought
too
in
depth,
but
as
per
jeter's
suggestion,
maybe
just
kind
of
like
going
through
the
document
that
we've
got
started
and
kind
of
chat
about
things.
If
there's
things
that
people
want
to
raise
discussion,
points
on
and
kind
of
go
through,
I
don't
know
if
anyone
has
other
other
thoughts
on
how
to.
C
A
That
sounds
good,
then
I
guess
is
it
worth
me
just
like
sharing
my
screen.
Is
that
the
easiest
way
to
do
this.
C
A
Cool
okay
yeah,
so
I
guess
the
first
thing
kind
of
thinking
through
is:
why
do
we?
Why
should
we
formalize
governance,
and
these
were
just
like
a
few
thoughts
I
put
down?
Has
everyone
here
like
read
through
this?
If
we
sort
of
skim,
does
that
work,
or
do
we
want
to
kind
of
just
like
take
a
moment
and
and
read.
D
C
E
Okay,
yeah,
I
read
through
it.
A
A
Fair
enough
yeah,
so
I
guess,
if
a
few
of
the
bigger
picture,
things
is
kind
of
thinking
through
like
recognizing
what
responsibilities
people
have
and
making
that
a
bit
more
explicit,
as
well
as
acknowledging
contributions,
so
I've
even
found
you
know
when
like
applying
for
grant
funding
and
things
like
that,
like
how
do
I
talk
about
what
I
do
in
simpeg
and
we
haven't
really
decided
on
that,
so
it
like
makes
it
kind
of
awkward,
and
so
I
think
you
know
defining
some
of
those
things
figuring
out
like
where
to
point
new
users
and
contributors
is
like
who
who's
their
point
of
contact.
A
Depending
on
what
they're
interested
in
doing
and
who
kind
of
has
a
bit
of
perhaps
elevated
responsibility.
I
mean
again,
it's
still
like.
We
are
an
open
source
project.
These
are
volunteer
roles.
It's
not
like.
We
want
to
be
strapping
extra
responsibility
onto
folks,
but
in
a
sense
like
if
you
are
kind
of
a
core
contributor,
there
is
a
bit
more
responsibility
with
that,
and
so
so
making
that
explicit
again,
not
like
my
goal
here
is
not
to
like
add
adds
burden
to
anyone.
A
It's
much
more
to
define
where
those
where
those
responsibilities
are
and
who
is
willing
to
take
them
on.
A
So
then
I
broke
out
the
strategies
for
code
and
community,
I
think,
is
two
different
things
that
are
both
important,
but
both
sort
of
take
different
skill
sets
and
thought
that
goes
into
them
as
figuring
out.
What
are
how
do
we
sort
of
evolve
and
prioritize
in
in
development?
You
know
so
far.
We
we
do
that
all
through
the
the
meetings,
but
I
guess,
like
who's
kind
of
responsible
for
for
keeping
that
in
mind,
coming
to
the
meetings
each
week.
A
Thinking
about
that
longer
term
vision,
as
opposed
to
like
to
balance
out,
I
guess
sort
of
the
immediate
needs
of
any
given
project
same
thing
for
community
is:
how
do
we
want
to
be
reaching
out
to
other
folks?
Who
else
should
we
be
engaging?
How
do
we
make
sure
that
it
stays
a
healthy
and
positive
community,
and
what-
and
I
also
identifying
things
that
we
should
be
improving
and
you
know
being
able
to
hold
those
conversations
and
and
surface
some
of
those
challenges.
A
I
think
one
of
the
important
things
about
formalizing
governance
is
decisions
when
there's
competing
priorities.
So
when
there
is
a
point
of
conflict
and
a
decision
needs
to
be
made,
the
governance
model
should
help
answer
that
I
mean
hopefully,
that
these
events
are
rare,
but
we
want
to
have
a
process
if
they
do
come
up
and
not
sort
of
be
deciding
both
of
those
things
on
the
fly,
because
that
is
a
recipe
for
disaster.
A
A
Thanks
for
joining
we're
just
kind
of
reading
through
the
document
now
and
we'll
sort
of
pause
and
prompt
discussions,
so
yeah
feel
free
to
feel
free
to
jump
in.
A
I
guess
another
point,
and
this
is
sort
of
come
up
when
I
actually
started
looking
into
paying
for
slack,
is
like
the
question
of
who
who
pays
for
slack
and
where
do
those
funds
come
from
how's?
That
acknowledged
things
like
the
website
and
hosting
data
like
right
now,
the
google
storage
bucket
is
on
rowan's
credit
card.
A
It's
not
like
a
huge
expense,
but
at
the
same
time
like
should
he
actually
be
personally
paying
for
that,
probably
not
and
so
yeah,
so
those
kinds
of
like
perhaps
more
mundane
but
but
important
decisions,
because
we
don't
want
people
paying
out
of
pocket
for
slack.
For
example,
that's
not
okay,.
E
For
everything
all
all
expenses
of
synthetic
you
know:
what's
the
overhead.
A
So
I
think
that's
a
good
question.
I
don't
have
the
number
off
the
top
of
my
head.
I
think
for
like
the
website
so
like
the
domain
purchase
is
probably
50
bucks
or
20
to
50
annually,
not
quite
50,
probably
around
the
20
mark
annually,
the
hosting
on
google
cloud
of
storage,
and
everything
like
that,
I
think,
is
on
the
order
of
like
seven
dollars
a
month
or
something
like
that
and
then,
if
we
do
decide
to
upgrade
slack,
that's
a
non-trivial
expense.
A
I
think
ballpark
500
a
year
was
kind
of
with
with
the
discount.
If
we're
able
to
get
it
with
how
many
users
we
have
so
none
of
those
are
huge
and
I
can
double
check
those
those
values.
E
A
Yeah,
no,
so
we're
not
we're
not
paying
for
slack
right
now.
If
we
were
to
pay
for
slack
to
be
able
to
get
our
data
and
those
sorts
of
things,
that's
around
the
the
ballpark
that
it
would
that
it
would
come
out
yeah
and
then
same
thing
like
sort
of
thinking
down
the
road
for
like
zoom,
for
example.
I
mean
right
now
everybody's
getting
it
for
free
through
universities,
but
that
might
not
be
the
case
when
the
world
hopefully
goes
back
to
some
sense
of
normalcy.
A
G
Yeah-
and
I
think
it's
not
just
that-
probably
not
rowan
should
pay
for
it,
but
it's
also
for
or
anyone
else,
but
also
for
stability.
What,
if
someone
totally
changed
credit
card
it
stops
paying
because
he
can't
anymore
yeah.
It
would
be
more
stable
if
it's
kind
of
from
a.
A
G
A
There
is
an
educational
one
and
actually
in
some
senses-
and
this
is
a
discussion
we
can
dive
into
further
later,
but
I
don't
think
we
need
to
go
into
too
much
detail
here.
I
was
kind
of
thinking.
I
think
I
suspect
it
will
be
much
easier.
Well,
there's
two
things
we
could
do
is
one
we
could
apply
through
gif
and
just
say
it.
It
serves
the
research
group
and
that's
the
main,
that's
the
main
thing
or
the
main
sort
of
educational
avenue
there,
and
I
think
that
that
would
be.
A
That
would
be
fine
and
it
would
probably
go
through.
E
A
Not
entirely
sure
yet
is
I
think
that,
like
there
will
be
there
will
be
some
of
that
there's
a
question
of
like
dude:
does
it
sort
of
morph
into
something
different?
Do
we
just
do
I
just
adopt
that,
but
there'll
be
some
some
blending
of
that
in
some
senses,
yeah.
B
H
Yeah
just
geophysics
right,
it
depends
what
lindsay
fluency
wants
to
focus,
yeah
physics
or
not,.
A
Yeah
and
sort
of
bringing
in
the
data
science
element
is
something
I'd
like
to
do,
and
so,
if
that's
under
the
diff
umbrella
or
like
part
of
I
I
haven't,
we
haven't
figured
that
out,
but.
A
Parachute
fair
enough
and
I
think
doug
just
jumped
in
too
hey
doug,
sorry
guys.
I
can't.
A
No
problem,
okay,
so
these
are
like
some
of
the
high
level
things
that
we're
sort
of
thinking
about
with
respect
to
governance.
Are
there
any
things
you
think
are
missing
from
this
list?
Are
there
descriptions
you
think
are
missing?
Do
you
want
to
share
your
thoughts
on
this
I'll,
stop
talking
for
a
moment.
G
I
would
maybe
like
to
add
a
point
under
the
first
point
that
doesn't
probably
belong
to
under
the
governance,
but
I
think
when
I
started
with
simpek,
it
would
have
helped
me.
A
lot
is,
if
you
write,
maybe
it
exists
somewhere,
but
maybe
an
a4
page
of
a
bit
the
history
like
who
started
with
simpac,
who
I
looked
at
the
git
history
but
yeah.
What
was
the
reason?
G
And
then
this
could
give
a
lot
of
insight
about
why
things
are
the
way
they
are
like
naming
and
conventions,
and
then,
I
think,
later,
looking
and
reading
a
bit
the
book
by
harbor
haber.
I
don't
know
how
you
pronounce
him
and
look
at
his
exercises.
I
think
realize
that
probably
a
lot
comes
from
there
and
just
give
some
history
who
started
why?
Because
also
that
one
of
the
first
contribute
was
this
lady
that
I
I
think
that
was
in
the
computational
group.
What
is
she
called?
I
don't
know
her.
G
Yes
and
so
just
kind
of
yeah
what
are
kind
of
the
roots,
and
how
did
it
came
to
what
it
is,
because
it
would,
I
think,
for
new
ones.
It
would
a
bit
help
to
understand
some
of
the
reasoning
and
design
decisions
and-
and
why
do
things
work
the
way
it
worked?
That
is
maybe
clear
for
soggy
and
lindsey
and
rogan,
because
they
always
work
with
that.
But
it's
not
so
clear
for
someone
not
from
ubc.
B
I
guess
in
some
ways
I
feel
that's
the
kind
of
the
responsibility
of
the
landing
page
for
some
of
these
websites
is
I'm
a
new
person.
I
know
nothing.
What's
the
first
thing
that
I
need
to
to
understand
when
I
arrive
here
and
then
we
we
point
to
other
places,
one
of
the
things
is
like
getting
started
for
developers
and
then
you
can
go
down
that
that
avenue.
G
B
Yeah,
I
agree.
That's
that's
smart.
G
D
So
one
one
thing
I
think
what
I'd
be
interested
to
talk
about
is
the
the
strategy
for
the
code.
D
No,
it's
it's
kind
of
developed
in
a
very
organic
kind
of
a
way,
and
I
think
one
of
the
one
of
the
issues
we
face
is
kind
of
stability
versus
new
stuff
like
get
like
a
core
of
stable,
stable,
core
stuff
versus
bringing
in
new
stuff
all
the
time
and
keeping
that
kind
of
balance
of
really
well
documented
core
stuff.
It's
not
going
to
change
much.
D
C
H
D
Yeah
exactly
so,
where
do
we
want
to
what
do
we
want
the
code
to
be
doing?
What
are
the
core
parts
of
that?
You
know
where,
where
are
they
at
on
their
journey
towards
being
like
a
version
one
or
a
version,
two
kind
of
thing
I.
C
D
I
If
I'm
my
other
thoughts
on
that,
I'm
just
thinking
of
a
few
dumb
and
with
me
is
that
as
a
geosoft
analyst
is
using
more
and
more
thin
peg,
you,
you
will
probably
want
to
have
yes
something
stable
or,
like
maybe
just
call.
I
think
the
versioning
is
nice
for
that
because,
like
we
can
just
call
like
a
specific
version
of
steampunk
and
with
ngo
and
geosoft
analyst
you
you
can
update,
which
version
you
call
when
things
become
stable
more
but
yeah.
That's.
E
I
D
F
The
other
extreme,
though,
is
what
I
can
see
like
what
I
hope
not
to
happen
is,
let's
say
like
some
of
the
other
faculties
like
use
simpac
as
an
engine,
but
don't
feed
back
in
to
the
main
code
base,
because
I
think
I
can
easily
set
that
could
happen.
That
might
happen
already
like,
like
javascript,
I
think
they're
bringing
they're
trying
to
bring
this
in,
but
this
process
is
not
trivial
and
I
mean
as
a
phd
student
as
a
researcher.
Their
goal
is:
writing
a
paper
and
getting
their
research
done
so
yeah.
F
We
need
some
sort
of
like
a
strategy
to
promote
that
bring
that
back
in
their
development
as
well.
G
That's
maybe
just
something
yeah
you
can
promote,
because
that's
a
problem
of
the
whole
open
source
community
complaining,
debian,
complaining
ubuntu,
is
not
feeding
upstream
red
hat
complaining,
the
other
one
yeah.
I
don't
think
we
should
lose
our
sleep
over
that
it's
something
we
should
promote
and
push,
but
if
not,
then
we
chose
an
open
source
license.
So
we
cannot
ask
it
back
unless
we
take
gpl
and
then
no
one
would
use
it
and
then.
B
And
that
maybe
I
could
do
in
the
near
future
is
to
really
like
make
the
step-by-step
process
for
for
doing
this
right
now
we
have
all
the
pieces
like
you
know.
This
is
how
you
should
name
variables,
and
this
is
how
you
should
name
classes,
and
this
is
how
we
want
you
to
do
your
doc
strings,
and
this
is
the
process
for
bringing
your
stuff
in.
B
If
you
want
to
merge
it,
we
have
that
stuff
kind
of
in
there,
but
it
would
be
nice
to
have
it
as
like
a
very
explicit,
step-by-step
process,
because
that
just
seems
to
be
how
human
brains
work,
so
you
could
say
you've
branched
off
of
simpag.
You
did
some
cool
stuff.
What's
your
first
step,
okay,
make
sure
that
you've
named
your
variable,
like
you,
you
have
it
according
to
this
okay
now,
so
you
could
just
kind
of
go
down
the
list
and
once
you've
completed
the
list.
B
E
I
agree
dev
and
I
guess
all
the
lenders
that
exist
out
there,
that
you
know
the
code.
E
The
code
checking
kit
could
possibly
do
this,
but
I
have
the
feeling
that
we
need
to
treat
the
pull
requests
and
the
people,
for
instance,
right
now
right
xiaolong,
is
his
stuff
has
been
there
for
two
weeks
and
I
don't
think
anyone
looked
that
up
and
that's
not
good
for
that's,
not
good,
for
you
know
to
to
encourage
collaboration,
because
if
their
stuff
is
sitting
there
for
too
long
with
no
one
looking
at
it,
then
it's
discouraging
right.
We
should
as
care
as
a
group.
E
D
G
But
even
even
if
it's
important
or
not
important,
I
think
it
would
be
good
if
you
could
come
up
and
any
issue
pr
is
answered
within
10
days
or
so
and
labeled,
and
so
the
one
who
submitted
it
knows,
someone
looked
at
it
even
and
mesa
might
say.
Oh,
this
is
really
off
topic
and
it
might
take
a
long
time
or.
D
Yeah,
it
should
at
least
be
acknowledged
that
it's
yes,
we've
seen
it
and
we're
thinking
about
it.
Kind
of
thing.
B
Yeah,
it
sounds
like
I
mean
we,
we
allocate
time
each
week
to
a
meeting
and
we're
able
to
adhere
to
that,
and
I
wonder
if
we
could
specify
a
particular
time
where
reviewers
would
get
together,
partition
out
active,
pull
requests
and
then
and
then
take
a
look
at
it
or
take
some
kind
of
responsibility
for
it.
We
just
set
the
set
at
a
time
in
the
week.
B
E
B
I
I
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
say
like
oh
for
new
contributors,
we
give
them
a
high
priority
to
introduce
them
faster
because,
like
the
the
fact
that
it's
been
here
for
weeks,
at
least
for
me,
it's
been
something
very
usual
on
my
here.
That's
like
I
can
yeah,
so
just
just
the
thoughts
of
like
how
you,
if
you
treat
like
how
you
treat
maybe
new
contributors
on
on
a
priority
level
compared
to
the
core
team.
I
I
don't
know
just
just
a
thought
for
that,
but
yeah
like
definitely
like
the
pr
thing
is
like
sometime
I
like,
because
sometimes
when
it's
it's
been
sitting
here
for
like
a
few
months,
I'm
even
forgetting
myself
that
I
put
a
pr
like
three
months
ago
and
nobody
looked
at
it.
D
I
guess
how
has
that
worked
in
terms
of
you
know,
maintaining
two
things
and
is
that
kind
of
a
something
that
could
be
done
for
other
parts
of
simpek?
I
don't.
I
haven't
really
thought
about
in
any
great
detail,
but
is
that
kind
of
a
strategy
for
I
guess
I'm
thinking
of
like
core
stuff
versus
new
stuff
again?
Is
there
any
of
the
core
stuff
that
could
become
a
separate
thing.
F
Yeah
I
like
in
general-
I
think
so
I
think
at
the
end
and
at
the
very
extremes
impact
will
be
like
our
hope.
I
think
our
our
initial
thought
was
simpek
will
be
lightweight
a
framework
that
doesn't
really
include
many
things,
but
you
got
some
packages
that
you
can
just
plug
in,
like
a
discretize,
optimize
mapping,
yeah
simulation
so
down
the
road,
that's
the
plan.
I
guess
I.
D
Yeah,
like
I
was
thinking
some
of
the
core,
you
know,
like
the
optimization
part,
you
know
whether
that
you
know
whether
that's
split
the
nuts.
C
F
Right,
like
that
kind
of
like
opens
up
the
door
for
actually
other
disciplines
to
come
because
like
if
the
synthetic
is
very
overwhelming
package,
there's
a
lot
of
things.
But
if
you
speak
like
kind
of
break
that,
apart
to
a
few
different
things,
then
actually
it's
kind
of
much
easier
for
other
people
to
come
and
actually
use
it
or
contribute
that
so
yeah.
I
thought
in
general,
that's
a
probably
more
healthier
model
and
discretizes.
G
Her
yeah,
it's
brilliant,
I
use
it
now
and
other
packages
are
going
to
use
it
because
it's
that's
all
this
well
for
me,
good
are
the
plotting.
Functionalities,
for
other
will
be
good,
all
the
the
the
edge
curl
internal
computation
it
has
and
it
can
be
used
easily
because
it's
very
lightweight
it
has
almost
no
dependencies
right.
G
Scipy
does
and
numpy
they
have
domain
specialists,
so
you
would
have
one
that
is
responsible
for
magnetics
in
simpek
one
for
dc,
and
if
there
is
a
pull
request
or
issue
in
this,
you
kind
of
know
who
is
probably
going
to
look
at
it.
That
would
be
something
we
could
think
of
to
have
domain
responsible
people.
C
G
No,
no,
it
is
in
in
I
just
know
inside
pipe.
That's
what
I
follow
more.
G
Basically,
if
you
contribute
a
lot
you
get
into
the
core
team
and
usually
a
contributor
mostly
contributes
to
one
linux
or
optimize
or
or
the
sparse
and
they're,
then
also
there
and,
like
I
had
I
had
in
the
the
fft
with
something
open
for
years
now
they
switched
out
all
the
things,
but
they
had
basically
no
one
really
strongly
in
the
fft
for
a
long
time.
So
nothing
happened
there
because
yeah,
it's.
G
If
you
have
someone
who
knows
the
code-
and
it
might
happen
with
simpek
too,
because
like
cypress,
then
I
I
think
they
are
so
big
that
even
a
con
core
contributor
doesn't
necessarily
know
all
the
parts
of
it
right,
and
that
will
probably
be
this
impact
too.
That
someone
knows
a
lot
about
the
magnetics,
but
not
about
electromagnetics,
for
instance.
So.
D
Does
it
does
having
those
and
kind
of
separate
packages
make
that
easier,
then
to
to
maintain,
if
it's
not
part
of
some
behemoth,
that
very
few
people
know
the
whole
thing,
but
it
consists
of
a
lot
of
smaller
parts.
C
But
I
don't
think.
E
F
Yeah,
I
yeah
I'm
not
sure
that
I
see
like
a
breaking
apart
like
a
separate
simulation
or
a
problem
down
the
road
because,
like
it's
like
a
rather
like
a
kind
of
more
generic,
like
part
like
an
optimized
mapping,
that
types
of
stuff
can
be
broken
apart,
but
I
don't
know
like
if
the
synthetic
was
really
big
then
it
might.
I
would
think
about
actually
breaking
apart,
that
simulation
problem
into
a
separate
package,
but
yeah
I
don't
like
in
five
years.
I.
C
A
It's
important,
but
a
different
conversation.
So
are
there
any
other
things
here
that
you
think
that
we
should
put
on
the
table
as
like?
We
need
governance
to
be
able
to
do
x,
or
does
this
basically
sum
up
the
things
and
we
can
always
revisit
this,
but
is
there
anything
that's
like
standing
out?
That's
missing
from
this
sort
of
big
picture
list.
A
Yes
and
right
now
for
reference
on
that,
we
we
do
have
a
code
of
conduct
in
simpeg
and
right
now,
rowan,
and
I
are
the
points
of
contact
for
that.
So
if
you
email
that,
I
think
it's
code
of
conduct
at
simpeg.xyz
that
goes
to
myself
and
and.
A
A
Okay,
so
I
think
perhaps
the
next
thing-
and
we
were
actually
sort
of
talking
a
bit
about
this-
is
kind
of
like.
So
what
are
the
sort
of
semi-official
roles
we
currently
have,
and
then
how
does
that?
Maybe
map
to
other
governance
models?
What
features
do
we
want
to
look
at,
so
this
was
sort
of
the
breakdown
when
I
was
just
kind
of
looking
at
roughly
the
folks
who
are
engaged
in
the
community?
A
What
do
things
kind
of
look
like
so
there's
the
people
who
started
simpeg,
which
I
guess
would
be
rowan
soggy
and
myself
in
the
early
days.
A
There's
folks
who
are
the
admins,
and
so
this
is
people
who
kind
of
have
the
keys
to
simpeg
and
most
of
the
places
so
rowan
myself,
joe
and
tebow
on
github,
have
access
to
basically
everything
soggy's
got
access
to
the
google
storage
and
all
the
google
side
of
things
as
well,
and
so
this
can
obviously
change
but
like
just
currently
stating
who
has
permission
to
delete
all
the
things
these
people
have
permission
to
do
that,
then.
This
is
where
I
think
it
like.
A
These
are
a
bit
easier
to
sort
of
just
like
state
based
on
you
know
who
has
permission
to
do
stuff.
These
are,
of
course,
sort
of
fuzzier
definitions,
but
I
think
kind
of
maybe
you're
somewhat
reflective
but
feel
free
to
jump
in
if
you
think
otherwise,
so
core
contributors,
I
would
say
this
is
sort
of
people
who
contribute
to
the
code.
A
Documentation,
tutorials
community
support,
answering
questions,
onboarding
people
on
a
somewhat
regular
basis
and
obviously
that's
that's
loosely
defined,
but
people
who
kind
of
show
up
and
participate-
and
I
don't
mean
that
only
by
folks
who
like
write
code,
because
I
think
that
that's
a
very
narrow
definition.
I
think
somebody
who
spends
time
answering
questions
on
discourses
is
doing
just
as
much
sort
of
valuable
work
for
the
community.
A
I
think
there's
some
category
of
like
core
contributors
that
are
I've
seen
in
the
joss
world.
They
use
the
term
emeritus,
so
people
who
have
in
the
past
contributed
substantially
to
the
project
but
are
sort
of
no
longer
on
that
day-to-day
sort
of
regular
participation.
A
So
folks,
like
rowan,
goodney,
dave
and
dave
and
others
and
then
broadly
sort
of
the
community
of
people
who
use
simpeg
in
their
work
research,
whether
they're
in
touch
with
us
or
not,
people
who
sort
of
periodically
contribute,
ask
and
answer
questions
on
a
less
less
regular
basis.
G
E
Yeah
because
that's
fair
point
right
there
I
mean,
for
instance,
there's
people
that
use
impact.
They
don't
they
don't
they
don't
even
know
you
know
they
run
in
versions.
They
don't
even
know
that
you
know
they
don't
care
where
it
comes
from.
They
just
they're
just
running
it.
So
there's
like
even
like
a
higher
level
of
abstraction.
A
Worries
we
were
just
sort
of
chatting
through
this
this
section
here.
D
A
Okay,
so
then,
maybe
let's
just
take
a
brief
look
at
like
a
few
governance
models.
We
can
chat.
I
mean
this
is
obviously
I've
listed
two
there's,
obviously
more
than
this
and
like
a
lot
more
nuance
depending
on
the
project,
but
to
give
folks
a
flavor
and
then
feel
free
to
jump
in.
I
know
dieter's
done
a
lot
of
looking
at
this
and
it
would
be
useful
to
get
your
perspective
from
the
sci-fi
side
of
things
too.
A
So,
like
a
couple
of
the
common
ones
that
you
see
in
the
python
open
source
world,
so
there's
the
bdfl
model,
and
so
I
believe,
scipy
uses
this.
That's
right.
Dieter.
I
A
A
This
person
is
then
meant
to
step
in
and
make
make
a
decision,
there's
often
sort
of
a
steering
council-
that's
also
associated
with
this,
and
so
the
idea
being
that
the
bdfl
like
consults
with
the
steering
council
in
general
on
discussions
and
that's
they're
sort
of
that,
like
the
steering
council,
is
meant
to
be
helping
sort
of
guide
guide
the
direction
of
the
project,
but
the
if
there
is
a
conflict
that
cannot
be
resolved.
It's
the
job
of
the
bdfl
to
do
that.
A
There's
also
examples
that
rely
like
entirely
on
a
steering
council
and
so
there's
no
one
person
who
is
like
the
final
decision
maker.
So,
for
example,
python
has
moved
to
more
of
this
model
where
you
have
an
odd
number
of
people
and,
if
like
there
is
something
where
a
decision
needs
to
be
made
and
consensus
is
not
sort
of
being
built
by
the
community.
The
steering
council
votes
and
that's
the
decision,
thoughts.
E
D
G
Instance,
ubuntu
has
also
that
system
which
is
huge,
but
you
never
seen
also
in
sci-fi.
The
actually
the
face
you
most
often
see
is
ralph
commerce,
you
might
see
in
github
or
things
but
he's
not
actually
the
pdf
l.
So
it's
not
even
the
most
visible
person,
it's
maybe
just
the
longest
around
or
the
most
knowledgeable.
G
For
me,
most
most
projects
with
bdfl.
They
grow
organically.
So
it's
someone
who
is
there
almost
from
the
beginning,
and
I
think
that's
also
why
python
might
think
of
switching
now
as
far
as
understood
because
well
it
used
to
be
the
creator
and
he
kind
of
stepped
down,
and
I
guess
it
would
be
hard
to
crown
a
new
king
after
after
all
of
the
fuss
around
python.
So.
A
Yeah,
I
think
it's
now
a
five
person
steering
council,
and
so
I
guess,
like
some
of
the
hesitation,
I
have
a
bit
was
the
bdfl
model,
but
these
are
bigger
projects.
But
so
both
python
and
jupiter
are
very
much
moving
away
from
that,
because
the
projects
have
gotten
in
a
sense,
so
big
that
no
one
person
actually
really
like
knows
the
landscape
of
the
whole
project
anymore
and
so
like
having
that
person
sort
of
be
responsible
for
decisions,
no
no
longer
works
and
there's
a
lot
of
friction
with
that.
A
And
I
think,
with
the
python
side
of
things
it
completely
burned
guido
out-
and
I
think
part
of
that
is
that
they
perhaps
didn't
have
the
right
structures
of
like
who
else
is
responsible
for
other
things
in
place
and
so
like
it
sort
of
ended
up
defaulting
that
he
was
responsible
for
all
the
things
which
is
is
not
a
healthy
situation
to
be
in,
but.
G
But
you
can
easily
also
handle
it
that
it's
only
the
decision
if
the
steering
council
has
a
path
right.
So
it's
not
a
decision
on
your
on
the
bfdl.
It's
just
a
deciding
half
a
vote
or
I
don't
know
that
if
there
is
a
two
two
or
a
three
three,
depending
on
how
many
people
and
one
doesn't
want
to
vote,
then
yeah,
I
don't
know.
E
F
I
don't
know
like.
I
wouldn't
want
to
be
a
bdfl
at
all.
I
guess
so
and
if
there's
anybody
who
wants
to
be
a
pdf,
we
could
go
with
it,
but
I
don't
know
like
just
about
it
seems
like
having
a
council,
have
multiple
people
and
then
sort
of
like
responsible
to
a
certain
sector
and
I'm
not
sure
how
we
break
that
apart
to
a
different
sectors.
But
I
think
that
seems
like
much.
I
don't
know
like
a
healthier
model.
I
guess
for
us,
I'm
not.
A
A
So
one
of
the
things
that
I
don't
know
if
anybody
watched
the
jupiter
govern
or
the
some
of
the
talks
from
jupiter
khan,
fernando
and
brian,
gave
a
talk
on
governance
and
I
think
there's
a
couple
things
that
were
quite
interesting
to
me.
That
sort
of
stood
out,
as
is
important
learnings,
is
the
need
to
sort
of
separately.
A
These
are
our
things
to
separate
is
because
so
one
of
the
things
that
happened
is
the
steering
council,
for
example,
got
so
big
with
jupiter
that
it
became
really
tough
to
make
decisions
in
a
timely
fashion,
like
I
think
the
steering
council
ended
up
being
or
is
currently
like,
17
or
18
people,
and
so
responsibility
becomes
too
diffuse
and
like
when
you
send
an
email
asking
for
a
vote
and
opinions
like
it.
Just
it's
not
happening
in
a
timely
fashion
and
that's
a
bit
of
a
problem.
A
But
it
was
in
part,
it
grew
that
big,
because
it
was
basically
like
that
was
how
recognition
was
handed
out
is
like
if
you
contributed
to
the
project
for
long
enough,
you
were
put
on
the
steering
council
and
it
just
like
ballooned.
A
So
I
think
that's
something
we
want
to
be
careful
not
to
do,
and
that
can
happen
if
we
choose
a
bdfl
model.
If
we
choose
five
people
who
are
a
steering
council,
it
can
happen
either
way,
and
so
that's
just
something
to
be
wary
of.
A
Yeah,
I
don't
know,
if
thought,
if
folks
have
other
thoughts
on
that
things,
you
would
want
to
sort
of
see
in
place,
because
I
think,
like
one
of
the
things
that
and
where
I
came
to
sort
of
talking
about
titles
and
how
people
talk
about
what
they
do
in
simpeg
is,
I
think
it's
important
to
have
like
sure
there
can
be
a
steering
council.
A
But
it's
also
important
to
have
the
recognition
of
sort
of
responsibility
and
contribution
also
have
a
title
associated
with
it,
so
that
when
you
apply
for
a
grant,
when
you
apply
for
a
job-
and
you
want
to
tell
folks
what
you
do
with
simpeg
there's
something
that
we
agree
on
there
yeah.
So
I
don't
know
what
it.
What
do
folks
think
about.
E
What
if
we
just
determine,
who
are
the
core
contributors
and
then
every
year
or
yeah,
something
we
just
vote
in
the
steering
committee
and
then
just
like
a
foundation
or
whatever
right.
You
just
have
a
board.
Basically,
and
then
we
vote
on
people
that
they're
gonna
rule
rule
the
landscape,
just
a
thought.
E
E
Decide
who's
running
the
show
we
don't
want
to
have
like
basically
a
massive
bot,
just
computers
voting
and
someone
someone
ran
them.
You
know
what
I
mean.
H
E
Sure
yeah,
I'm
just
saying
it
would
be
great
if
the
community,
let's
call
the
community
votes,
and
I
guess
a
member
like
a
comedian,
it
probably
will
never
change.
You
know
we're
always
going
to
be
the
same
people,
but
if
someone
drops
out,
you
know
if
sagi
retires,
when
retiree
retires,
when
he's
too
old,
we
have
a
way
to
be
able
to
replace
him.
F
Yeah,
I
think,
for
sure
practice.
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
like
multiple
parts
that
could
helps
impact
to
be
used
and
like
having
opinion
from
user
base
and
then
having
a
important
applications
that
they
can
direct
their
development
in
simtec
could
be
quite
important,
so
yeah.
Definitely,
I
guess.
C
C
A
Okay,
so
we
have
like
10
minutes
left.
I
don't
know
what
the
most
so
okay.
Maybe
we
can
chat
through
this
like
sketch
of
a
breakdown,
and
then
we
can
sit
on
it
and
write
some
more
thoughts
down
and
maybe
regroup
in
a
week
or
two
and
see
if
we
can
start
to
like
sketch
out
something
that
kind
of
works.
A
So
what
I
tried
to
do
here
is
kind
of
just
sketch
out
like
what
does
simpeg
as
an
organization.
What
could
it
look
like
that
in
a
way
that
sort
of
already
jives
with
how
we're
operating,
because
I
don't
think
we
want
to
like
completely
restructure
how
we
do
everything?
Just
because
of
this
conversation
I
mean
the
decision-making,
and
all
of
that
is
the
project
is
moving
forward
and
we
haven't
had
any
major
problems,
and
so
we
don't
want
to
disrupt
something.
That's
working
but
put
some
more
structure
around
that.
A
So
these
are
like
a
sketch
of
roles
that
I
laid
out.
Titles
that
maybe
make
sense.
Maybe
not
so
I
think
the
way
things
are
kind
of
operating
is
like
the
idea
of
perhaps
having
somebody-
and
this
is
in
a
sense
also
similar
to
the
way
non-profits
kind
of
structure-
titles,
the
idea
of
a
managing
director,
so
somebody
who's
responsible
for
planning,
organizing,
laying
out
things
like
starting
conversations
around.
What
is
the
five-year
road
map,
these
kinds
of
these
kinds
of
things
and.
A
A
Director
of
operations-
and
I
guess
right
now-
I
would
see
this
primarily
as
kind
of
how
joe
is
is
operating.
Is
you
know
somebody
who's
day-to-day
overseeing?
How
simpag
is
is
moving
forward?
Making
sure
things
are
are
on
track,
full
reviews
are
getting
reviewed,
our
pull
requests
are
getting
reviewed.
Releases
are
happening
that
that
sorts
of
things
I
mean
again
sort
of
reiterating
that
it's
not
this
person's
job,
to
fix
everything
but
to
delegate
responsibility
so
that
things
stay
in
motion.
A
So
we
mentioned
sort
of
core
contributors,
and
so
I
would
say
that
somebody
who's,
you
know
consistently
investing
time
and
effort
in
the
project
through
any
of
software
development,
documentation,
tutorials
participating
in
the
community
asking
a
bunch
of
questions
so
again,
not
not
restricted
to
code
and,
like
roughly,
I
don't
know
a
week
to
week
basis.
Ish
I
mean
I
don't
think,
there's
a
hard
cutoff.
We
should
probably
figure
out
how
how
people
get
adopted
into
this.
A
A
Within
that-
and
I
think
this
is
perhaps
kind
of
mirrors
a
bit
of
what
dieter
was
mentioning
with
the
scipy
side
of
things-
is
potentially
also
having
a
domain
lead
designation.
A
I
don't
know
if
that's
the
right
title,
but
basically
somebody
who's
like
identified
as
the
point
person
for
a
given
method
for
a
given
just
like
scoped
chunk
of
simpek,
and
so
that
would
then
be
like
there'd,
be,
I
guess,
a
bit
of
an
expectation
that
you
know
people
can
come
to
you
with
questions
that
doesn't
mean
you
have
to
answer
them
all,
but
it
has
to
means
that
you,
you
know
you
you
care
that
they
get
answered,
and
so
this,
I
think,
would
basically
be
a
bit
of
a
way
to
sort
of
indicate
responsibility
that
folks
have
within
the
community,
be
a
title
that
you
could
take
elsewhere
and
yeah,
and
then
I
guess
yeah
something
along
the
lines
of
the
quirk,
some
something
to
indicate
for
folks
who
have
made
a
significant
contribution,
but
are
no
longer
active,
but
to
signal
that.
A
Okay,
somebody
added
this
that's
a
cool
idea
is
somebody
who
you
know
is
taking
responsibility
for
answering
questions
and
sort
of
being
like
a
bit
of
a
community
point
person.
I
quite
like
that
idea.
I
don't
know
if
somebody
added
that
and
wants
to
expand
on.
B
That
was
me
excellent
yeah
I
mean
we
want
people
to
be
answering
the
questions
that
show
up
in
discuss
and
act
just
kind
of
regularly
check
through
for
that
kind
of
stuff,
and
then,
if
I
kind.
B
Like
with
ubc
jiff
or
any
other
organization
is
there's
generally
some
kind
of
parent
email
or
something
some
account.
You
know
info.simpeg
at
gmail.com
or
whatever
it
is.
But
if
we
get
to
be
large
enough
and
there's
enough
traffic,
it
would
be
nice
to
have
a
central
place.
B
E
And
it
would
be
nice
for,
for
the
rest
of
us
to
not
have
to,
you
know,
be
forced
to
track
all
the
communications.
If
you
have
some
person
that
just
poke
you
and
you're
like
hey,
this
is
a
question
for
you:
go
and
sort
of
go
answer
that
guy
right,
that
would
be
awesome
or
someone
can
they
can
take
that.
B
A
Cool
and
then
the
last
designation
I
sort
of
we
have
written
down
here,
is
if
we
do
sort
of
pick
a
steering
council
model
or
a
bdfl
model,
having
some
sort
of
steering
council
of
folks
who
take
a
bit,
perhaps
more
responsibility
on
thinking
through
and
sort
of
being
a
support
person
for
people
who,
like
the
community,
liaison
like
the
director
of
operations
and
sort
of
take
on
an
elevated
responsibility
for
thinking
about
the
community
and
strategy
and
and
be
that
deciding
voice.
A
If
we
need
it,
if
all
other
sort
of
decision
making
methods
fail,
but
their
job
first
would
be
to
try
and
build
consensus
among
among
the
community.
A
So
we
have
we're
almost
up
on
the
hour.
I
don't
know
if
folks
have
like
immediate
thoughts,
you
want
to
share
or
ideas
for
next
steps
for
a
next
meeting.
E
I
have
the
feeling
that,
in
order
to
address
all
the
other
points
that
we're
talking
about,
you
know
like
the
vision
strategy
and
all
this
stuff,
we
should
have
a.
We
should
have
this
committee
already
voted
in
yeah.
I
would
recommend
that
we
just
fix
a
meeting
where
we
invite
all
the
people
that
we
want
people
to
vote,
and
then
we
just
elect
you
know,
raise
hand
and
say
you
do
this,
you
do
this
you're
either
you're
the
chair
or
whatever,
and
then
we
just
go
from
there.
A
That
sounds
good,
so
it
may
be
one
thing
to
do
because
I
think
the
first
before
we
vote
people
into
titles.
We
should
make
sure
that
these
titles
fit,
and
so
let's
maybe
like
over
the
next
week
or
so
add
your
notes,
thoughts
comments.
If
you
see
things
that
are
missing,
if
you
see
things
that
you
think
are
duplicates
or
whatever,
let's,
let's
try
and
sort
of
flesh
that
out
and
maybe
meet
in
a
week,
I
don't
know
if
that
works
for
folks
or
two
weeks.
A
I
guess
that's
getting
close
to
christmas.
Let's
try
for
a
week
if
that
works,
and
then
yeah
basically
kind
of
I
think
iron
out
like
this
chunk
is
like
what
what
does
simple
governance
kind
of
look
like
and
then
we
can
go
from
there
in
terms
of
starting
to
sketch
out
more
five
year
plans
and
and
poke
people
to
be
responsible
for
the
for
the
different
things.
A
G
Probably
not
too
good
for
me,
but
I've
I've
joined
in
one,
so
you
handle
the
other
one.
I.
C
A
G
A
Excellent
cool
thanks
everyone,
I'm
excited
we're,
making
some
progress
here
and
yeah
feel
free
to
add
your
notes,
thoughts
and
if
you
think
that
all
of
this
was
a
terrible
idea,
feel
free
to
also
also
share
that
and
get
in
touch
with
them.