The yearly PSF Board elections are going on, and as outgoing Chair of the Board I want to share my view of where the PSF is, where it's going, and what we should look for on the Board.
I've posted and tweeted about the PSF before (like Why I want people to donate to the PSF back in 2020, and How things sneak up on you right after this year's PyCon US), so I will be repeating myself... Because I think this stuff is important, and I don't know how many people know about the PSF, let alone realise how much it matters.
Full disclosure
Because I feel it's important to be honest about my biases: I have been a PSF Board member for 8 years now: 2020-2023, 2017-2019 and 2001-2004 (the PSF's first three years). I've also been on the Steering Council, which is a separate thing, for the last four years. I'm the Release Manager for Python 3.12 and 3.13. I've worked closely with all of the PSF staff, including Ewa Jodlowska, the previous Executive Director, and Deb Nicholson, the current one. I was the PSF's interim General Manager for half a year between Ewa and Deb. I somehow spend most of PyCon US behind the scenes. I see a lot of what goes on, and because of that I have some giant blind spots and I know it. I don't know what other people don't know about the PSF, so I don't know if I'm over-explaining or not.
My term is up this year, and I'm not running for re-election. I feel strongly that I have had more than my fair share of influence on the PSF, what with all my different roles, and it's time to let other people step up and take charge. Also, because of all my different roles, it's not like I won't be involved anymore. I just won't be voting on any PSF Board decisions anymore.
What does the PSF do?
The PSF is the non-profit (a US 501(c)(3)) that holds the Python trademarks and copyrights. It supports the development of Python and of the larger Python community, both on a technical front (like hosting PyPI) and by supporting user groups, meetups, conferences, and other Python projects. The PSF also organises the yearly PyCon US conference directly, and acts as a fundraising vessel for Python itself and the Python community as well as a growing set of fiscal sponsorships. To do all this, the PSF employs a small but growing number of staff, who are really very good at everything they do. Like, really good.
Although the PSF supports the development of Python, financially, organisationally and directly by hiring staff, it does not direct the technical development of Python. That's done by the Python Core Developers, and the Steering Council it elects. There is a lot of overlap in the people involved, though: many Core Developers are PSF Fellows, some have been PSF Board members, and several past and present Board members have served on the Steering Council (like me).
What does the PSF Board do?
The PSF Board is a fairly standard Board of Directors for a non-profit. Its duties are described in Delaware law (the PSF was incorporated in the state of Delaware), and the PSF bylaws. It's supposed to provide oversight and guidance for the Foundation. To make sure the PSF is following the law, representing the community it's supposed to represent, and collecting and spending money according to the community's wishes: the PSF's fiduciary duty.
The Board is also there to provide strategic guidance to the PSF. To hire the Executive Director (we hired Deb Nicholson last year, and I think she's great, so hopefully we're good for a little while) and set long-term goals that the ED and the rest of the staff should work towards. To set guidelines for grant requirements, donations, limits on spending. To help fundraise and advocate for the PSF and for Python.
A lot of what the Board does is delegation. Delegation to staff, committees (usually a subset of the Board) and PSF Work Groups (where volunteers do most of the work). The last two decades has helped us shape the PSF into something that works well for the Python community (although we're not done, and there's always room for improvement).
How has the PSF been doing?
Really great! We've been getting targeted donations for specific projects (like PyPI, and the CPython Developer-in-Residence) for a couple of years, but this year it's really been ramping up. I mentioned it in this earlier blog post in more detail, but we're in the process of hiring a bunch of people -- enough to be really exciting, but not too many to be unmanageable (or financially irresponsible). Thanks to the work of all the PSF staff, as well as the community support, the PSF is financially very stable. We have several years of cash runway as it is, and we now have a proven track record of spending grants and donations effectively, which gives us more ways to raise more funds.
What does the PSF need?
So what about the Board elections? What do I think you should look for in Board candidates? What kind of skills or representation do we lack on the Board?
This year none of the four Board members up for re-election (Dustin Ingram, Nina Zakharenko, Jeff Triplett, and me) decided to re-run for the Board. A few months back, long-time Board member and General Counsel Van Lindberg stepped down, as well. I can't speak for everyone else's motivations, but I don't think it's because things have gone badly on the Board, or with the PSF in general. (For me, it's quite the opposite: if things had been going badly, I would have run for re-election!) The Board has three overlapping three-year terms, so we're not leaving a vacuum behind. Also -- and I say this with all the love and admiration for everyone on the Board -- none of us are unmissable. We may each be unique and have valuable contributions, but so do all the candidates in this election.
We are, of course, losing a few things on the Board. Experience, for one. With Van leaving, a lawyer's insights. Representation in certain communities. Each of our unique points of view. But new Board members will bring their own experience, insights, representation and points of view. The elected Board also has ways to fill any gaps it sees, by hiring staff or consultants or delegating to volunteers who have the knowledge and expertise. Would it be nice to have a Board member with extensive non-profit experience, or with a strong legal background? Sure. But if not, that's fine too!
I nominated two candidates myself, Chris Neugebauer and Itamar Ostricher. They are very different candidates. Chris is a former Board member who has been a community organiser extraordinaire, and someone who has deep insights and strong opinions on how to improve the PSF and the PSF Board. Itamar, on the other hand, does similar work at Meta as I do at Google, and has been instrumental in Meta's continued funding of the Developer-in-Residence role at the PSF, and other projects. I think both are really excellent candidates with valuable contributions, and would serve very well on the Board.
Those nominations aside, I think the most important consideration is probably community representation. The PSF is best served with a diverse Board with eager volunteers with different points of view, different lived experiences, and different networks to involve in the PSF. Corporate experience, non-profit experience, open-source experience, legal, political, fundraising, social studies, hardware development -- we can use it all! If it wasn't impractical to have such a large Board, I'd choose everyone all at once.
Voting
The voting in this year's elections opened today, until Friday, June 30, 2023 11:59pm UTC. This year we're using OpaVote instead of Helios, in an effort to improve the ease of voting. To me, the biggest change is that OpaVote does not allow changing your vote. Helios, which we used for many years, lets you recast your ballot and only uses the last submitted ballot, and so I would always say to vote early and vote often. Not anymore! OpaVote only allows you to vote once, so take your time! Read up on the candidates, all of them! If you're worried about missing the deadline, set a reminder to vote on or before June 29. (That's what I've done.)
