On behalf of my co-authors, I’m happy to share that we’ve published an update of PEP 772, Packaging Council governance process (see also round 1 and round 2). This is the third – and hopefully final – round of changes before we can begin the formal approval process.
Please use this new thread for any additional feedback of this latest revision.
This version incorporates all the changes discussed at PyCon 2025’s Packaging Summit, as well as feedback from the PSF Board, through our co-author @Deb. In general, we’ve gotten very positive reactions to this version.
The list of significant changes are summarized as follows:
- Nominees to the PC must themselves be PSF voting members.
- Clarity is added around how PSF voting members are informed of and may opt-in or -out of PC elections, including the ability to do so independently of their participation in Board elections. This also aligns affirmations of the intent to vote in PC elections with a manner and process similar to PSF Board election affirmations.
- We’ve removed specifics about the voting process, including the explicit mandate for Bloc STAR, in order to ease the administration of the election by the PSF Staff, and to align the election process with PSF Bylaws. Since PC elections are run concurrently with PSF Board elections, and administered by the same staff members, and due to the (current) difficulty of finding a suitable open source platform for PC elections, this PEP leaves the mechanics of the election process to the PSF and the Returns Officer. This is a practical solution that allows for fair, transparent elections as well as flexibility to change the election mechanics in the future if such a platform is identified.
- The PEP now describes “off-cycle” elections, since the initial election, and any future post-recall elections may not align with the annual PSF Board election.
- There’s some slight rewording about the prohibition against sitting SC members from serving on the PC.
- A better description of what happens in partial (i.e. cohort) elections to ensure the “no two members from the same employer” rule.
- The PC and its participants are explicitly placed under the PSF Code of Conduct.
- Explicitly mention that PSF voting members can opt out of PC elections independently of their choice to participate in PSF board elections.
- The Returns Officer is nominated by the PSF Board.
- The PSF Board has the responsibility to certify the PC election.
- In the unlikely case that vacancies are unfillable by the normal process, the Board and SC consult to fill the vacancy.
- While the SC still has discretion over calls of no-confidence, the Board can override the SC.
@pradyunsg, @Deb and I are incredibly grateful to everyone who has contributed their energy, constructive feedback and suggestions, and insight into this final round of edits. This is a much better proposal because of your participation.