Sorry, I completely forgot about this. Some comments "Voting is by lazy consensus where a +1 vote is sufficient to move forward and a single -1 vote is sufficient to block a proposal. All PMC member votes are equal; the chair has no veto power. Voting SHOULD strive for consensus."
I thought we agreed that a single +1 should not be sufficient for the majority of the decisions (at least from looking back at this thread). Also, "Communication may also occur through other appropriate channels as needed, such as video/voice conference calls, IRC and IM. " It may be good to encourage people to summarize these out of email-band conversations into a transcript on-list for people who were not there, as a record, and to give other people on the call/chat an opportunity to correct misunderstandings. I don't know if I'd say "MUST" but maybe "SHOULD" ? Cheers, Scott On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Marvin S. Addison <marvin.addi...@gmail.com > wrote: > Draft proposal is up for final comments and feedback: >> >> https://wiki.jasig.org/**display/CAS/CAS+Project+**Management+Committee<https://wiki.jasig.org/display/CAS/CAS+Project+Management+Committee> >> > > Last call for comments. I'll send out a separate note requesting vote > Thursday if there is no further discussion by then. > > > M > > -- > You are currently subscribed to cas-dev@lists.jasig.org as: > scott.battag...@gmail.com > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see > http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/**display/JSG/cas-dev<http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev> > -- You are currently subscribed to cas-dev@lists.jasig.org as: arch...@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev
