Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider core consumer libraries for membership? #26

Open
lucascolley opened this issue Dec 18, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #28
Open

Consider core consumer libraries for membership? #26

lucascolley opened this issue Dec 18, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #28

Comments

@lucascolley
Copy link

lucascolley commented Dec 18, 2024

The governance document says:

A relevant open source project that falls under the scope of a Consortium API standard (existing or being developed). Currently this includes array/tensor and dataframe libraries. What "relevant" means is hard to quantify in a metric; this will be decided upon by the existing Members.

It also mentions how initial membership invitations went out to array and dataframe (producing) libraries.

Now that the focus for the array API standard is shifting towards adoption, does it make sense to invite members from array consuming libraries? I would say they count as "relevant open source projects which fall under the scope of [the standard]" at this stage.


As a sidenote, I think https://github.com/data-apis/governance/blob/main/members_and_sponsors.md is a bit outdated - for example, I think @betatim is missing.

@rgommers
Copy link
Member

Yes definitely, we haven't updated this in quite a while! With the array API standard largely in good shape and updates focusing on pain points with adoption by consumer libraries, it makes perfect sense in my opinion to add array-consuming libraries.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants