Ted Husted wrote:
It also occurs to me that something the incubator project can do is provide a template set of guidelines and procedures for the projects. In the way of guidelines, we have a draft set that includes several "clarifications" , in case anyone in the incubator project is interested in this idea.
<http://jakarta.apache.org/site/proposal.html>
The proposal document outlines an enhancement to semantics of the +1, +-0 and -1 voting model as described below:
Each vote on an action item can be made in one of three four flavors:
+1 The action should be performed, and I will help.
+0 Abstain, I support the action but I can't help.
-0 Abstain, I don't support the action but I can't help with an alternative.
-1 The action should not be performed and I am offering an explanation or alternative.
I think the addition of the qualification "and I will help" or "I can't help" is orthoginal to the expression of support for something. In the case of the addition of a new committer - its not about suplying help or not, its aboout taking a position if a committer should be granted rights or not. If its about code change - its possible for someone to express an valid and informed opinion and contribute a binding vote (+1 or -1) without implication of a willingness to "help".
I would suggest re-phrasing the above as:
Each vote on an action item can be made in one of three four flavors:
+1 The action should be performed.
+0 Abstain, positive abstention.
-0 Abstain, negative abstention
-1 The action should not be performed (explanation or alternative
is required)Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL digital products for a global economy mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.osm.net
