commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <>
Subject Re: [Math] Commons Math (r)evolution
Date Sat, 11 Jun 2016 03:11:01 GMT

> On Jun 10, 2016, at 1:26 PM, James Carman <> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:29 PM Ralph Goers <>
> wrote:
>> Not only is the original chair not available, neither is a quorum of the
>> proposed PMC.  Why are you pushing this?  I, for one, am perfectly content
>> to keep Math here and see if those who have expressed interest in helping
>> out actually do and if others are attracted to fill in the gaps.
> I am pushing for it because I think it's the right thing to do for Math
> going forward.  Just like I pushed for it for years until we finally had an
> affirmative vote.  The fact that the others have left doesn't change my
> mind.  It only makes it more important, IMHO.  We need a more diverse
> community for Math.  It also needs to self-govern, however it sees fit.
> Being its own TLP will help attract more attention (especially with a trip
> through the incubator).  I would love to get involved with Math if they'd
> have me.  I was a math major in college, but I'm nowhere near the expert
> that these guys are I'm sure.  I could provide value as a general Java
> language and API resource, though.  If you're interested in Math, Ralph,
> why not come join us?

Personally, I think the vote that took place to move Math to a TLP should now be considered
void since the proposed PMC no longer exists. Furthermore, at the moment Math doesn’t have
a sufficient number of participants to make it a viable candidate for the incubator IMO. 
That may change over the next few weeks as people volunteer, but until that happens I find
the idea of pushing to be a TLP to be as foolhardy as Gilles’ proposal.

FWIW, I really have no interest in Math other than to make sure we don’t kill it by doing
something ill-conceived.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message