On May 7, 2013, at 22:10 , Dirkjan Ochtman <dirk...@ochtman.nl> wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Robert Newson <rnew...@apache.org> wrote: >> I'm not sure I fully agree. All the lazy consensus's of late have had >> a 72 hour window on them which is the same duration we use for couchdb >> releases. >> >> However, we can discuss what the minimum lazy consensus period can be >> based on what the minimum time that community members feel they can >> respond. >> >> I don't mean this as horribly as it will sound, but, to a degree, if >> someone can't take the time, in 3 days, to reply with '-1' to a >> thread, perhaps that's a problem too? The whole point of lazy >> consensus is to move forward quickly. We don't always need to wait for >> a large number of +1's to get work done. >> >> Finally, I'll agree that lazy consensus can be used inappropriately, I >> just don't think I agree that it's happened yet. > > +1 to all of that. Same. Jan -- > > Cheers, > > Dirkjan
