I feel this is a very exciting cross-cut and people with vast & diverse experience. Good luck to the initial council in getting started!
PS. It was a very close race around the cut-off, with only 6 votes separating 4th place from 7th
In particular, @pf_moore was not elected by a razorthin margin, but huge props & thanks a lot for shepherding python packaging until this point!
Congratulations from me as well to the new council. We have an excellent group of people here, and I look forward to seeing the packaging ecosystem grow and thrive under their leadership.
As you say, the result was incredibly close, which reflects the fact that we have a lot of extremely talented and capable people in the community. Thanks to everyone who participated, whether you were elected or not.
Congratulations from me too, and best of luck on the work ahead!
Given the ballots are public spent some analyzing the voting, some of the interesting results:
changing election methodology (mostly) yielded the same result,
only 48 of the 538 voters did not get at least one of their votes elected,
core packaging and scientific cohorts got representatives on council, though OS distros seems to have lost out, hope the council will still keep them in mind,
Congratulations! A great selection, and there were many good candidates on the ballot, thanks all for running.
Also huge thanks to @pf_moore for all your excellent work as the standing delegate all these years; you’ve set a high standard for the council to follow.
Of course, changing methodology also changes how people vote, so we can’t be so sure they’d yield the same result.
Interesting analysis, thanks! I hadn’t seen that the individual ballots were posted as well. I’m surprised to see that 36 people voted for all 17 candidates, which is effectively equivalent to not voting at all. Even though the system works very differently from STAR voting, the basic recommendation still applies: one should seek to express the maximum relative preference between candidates, which under the current voting rules can only be achieved by not voting for some people.
Definitely the case for me. IMO the voting methodology favoured established candidates (even beyond the advantage they already have by default from being well-known), so that affected how I structured my vote.
And thank you to everyone that participated as well as Paul who has been an amazing shepherd of packaging as well as a great mentor to many of us as we all try to move the packaging space forward for the future!
I am looking forward to working with the council and continued work with everyone in the community to continue to make the packaging space better and hopefully more welcoming to new contributors in the spaces that make up packaging.
Thanks folks! I’m excited to be a part of the inaugural council!
Yea, that’s like 91% or so – which is great!
PS: We should expect a formal blog post from the election officers by tomorrow/day after – they needed some time to verify some things before announcing the final formal result[1]!
Communicating this clearly has been listed under “what could we do better next time”. ↩︎
Congratulations to the new PPC! I’m really happy to see such a talented group of people elected, and I’m feeling optimistic about the future of Python packaging!
Congrats on the formation. I would suggest meeting with the wheel-next team. While wheel variants was our most important initiative to alleviate challenges with hardware specialized codes, it was only one of several. @tgamblin and I will also be leading some session on Python in HPC research centers at SC 26 in Chicago (mid Nov), that group has some other related challenges.
