Cycle 5: Continuation of the Matrix <> Slack Bridge

[Cadair]

No description provided.

[pllim]

As discussed on Slack, if this does not happen, Matrix users would have to actually create Slack accounts. Creating Slack user accounts is free. So my questions are:

• Under what condition would a user have access to Matrix but not Slack? Geopolitical stuff or just user relunctance?
• How many users will actually be affected?

Thanks!

[pllim]

And I would like to keep the scope of discussion here to Astropy users, not other projects that rely on Matrix.

[eteq]

@Cadair - this FR doesn't connect back to the roadmap, which is likely to lead to lower funding priority. That said, I suspect that might be intentional since it explicitly says "None" for the relevant roadmap items.

That being said, I think you're not being fair to your own proposal with that "none"! While I myself might not like it 😉, I think you could make a reasonable case that some of the roadmap items under https://github.com/astropy/astropy-project/blob/main/roadmap/roadmap.md#community-building-and-sustainability are relevant.

[hamogu]

I want to echo @pllim question here:

How many users will actually be affected?

If we don't know exact numbers, even an order-of-magnitude estimate would be useful. Is it just 1 user? Or are there 100 (which would still make this 30 $ / user)?

[Cadair]

I can try and run the stats, but I don't know how quickly I will be able to do that.

[Cadair]

Based on rough statistics over the last two years approximately 10% of active users on bridged chats were on matrix (out of a total of 213 active users).

[eteq]

Please react to this comment to vote on this proposal ( 👍, 👎 or no reaction for +0)

[pllim]

10% of active users

So we're talking about 20 people?

[Cadair]

yeah

[pllim]

$3000 for 20 people = $150/pax (not including future maintenance)

Not sure if this is worth it.

[kelle]

The Cycle 5 funding request process has been hugely successful! On the downside, that means our funds are severely oversubscribed. Even after the Finance Committee and SPOC have taken into consideration community feedback/voting and alignment with the roadmap, there are still more funding requests than we can afford in 2026.

We would like to stretch the budget as far as possible, and to fund as many activities as possible, while making sure the Project remains volunteer-driven. Hence, we would like to know if this project will still meet its deliverables if your minimum budget is reduced by 25%, 50%, or 100%. Or if there’s some other minimum, feel free to specify that instead.

As a reminder, there will be more funding for 2027 and we expect the Cycle 6 call for 2027 funding requests to begin in the Fall of 2026.

Thank you for your engagement and understanding as we continue to optimize our funding and budgeting processes and the balance of volunteer vs funded work!

(@Cadair)

[Cadair]

This isn't being funded anyway, but this is the minimum needed.