Hi everyone — I’m Petr Andreev, and I’m running for the 2026 PSF Board.
I’m a Python educator, CPython-internals specialist, community organizer, and international Python speaker.
A problem I keep seeing is that Python is very good at attracting people, but the path from newcomer → contributor → long-term contributor → community leader is often unclear.
People may want to contribute, but they do not always know where to start, how to grow, what responsibility comes next, or why they should keep investing their time for years.
I have been experimenting with these pipelines in universities in my courses: moving people from advanced Python education into research, CPython issues and PRs, conference speaking, mentoring, and eventually leadership.
This is what I want to work on at the PSF level:
clearer paths into contribution and increasing responsibility;
better contributor retention and motivation;
stronger mentorship, recognition, funded opportunities, and institutional support;
more people who not only join the community, but stay, grow, and eventually help others grow.
My broader goal is to help build a stronger pipeline of future Python community leaders.
Ask me anything about this, my candidacy, CPython, education, governance, funding, or where you disagree with my approach.
Since 2025 I base in Asia, speak at many PyCons, PSF contributing members and bring my students to Python conferences (speakers) and like new contributors.
Your nomination emphasizes moving people into CPython issues, PRs, and research. So in the past we have seen that the PSF board has historically skewed toward technical credibility, while community organizers, i.e the people who “figured out the money, the logistics, overcame the fear and doubt, even maybe the ones doing the grunt work of working with people” are underrepresented in governance.
If elected, how would you ensure that community-building (event organizing, local mentorship, cross-regional coordination) is treated as equally valid leadership experience when the PSF allocates resources, awards recognition, and sets strategic priorities, specifically in the region which you are currently based in?
Thank you, Iqbal. I cannot guarantee how the Board as a whole will be balanced, but I can be clear about the values I would bring to it.
I do not consider technical contribution more valuable than community leadership.
I have organized close to 30 communities of different scales, bringing together specialists from physics, mathematics, biology, and computer science — technical communities, so I know firsthand how much invisible work is required to build and sustain them.
For me, community-building is one of Python’s strongest assets — CPython and the wider ecosystem ultimately depend on healthy communities.
My program is therefore not only about creating more technical contributors, but also about creating and retaining more leaders: organizers, mentors, contributors, and people who help others grow.
So when discussing funding, recognition, or priorities, I would argue for metrics that include retention, mentorship, community impact, and leadership development — not technical output alone.
I’ve started a short video interview series for the final days of the election.
I hope it helps explain my program, priorities, and approach more clearly.
Why is your github activity not public ? I was looking to learn more about you as a PSF member myself, and since you have highlighted your technical contributions, I was keen to see your activity but it is private. Any reasons why this is so ? Don’t you want the public and Python community to see your contributions at the smallest detail ?
