On Sun, Aug 28, 2022 at 10:52:42AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 07:26:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Kurt Roeckx <k...@roeckx.be> writes: > > > > > That changes it from 5 to 4 seconds. It's unclear to me what I need to > > > do with the discussion period because of this. If I process the message > > > in order, I think this was accepted and A.1.4 changes the discussion > > > period. > > > > Yes, this was the intent. If a ballot option is accepted, the discussion > > period changes. If sponsors of that ballot option then withdraw so that > > it falls below the required number of sponsors, that triggers A.2.3, and > > there's a 24-hour period where new sponsors can step forward. If that > > does happen, there's no change to the ballot. If that doesn't happen, the > > option is withdrawn, but as A.2.3 says, that doesn't change the discussion > > period. So, either way, the discussion period is lengthened by the > > initially accepted ballot option. > > So reading A.2.3, there was a 24 hour window between the withdrawal and > finding a new sponsor. It seems that there was more than 24 hours. Does > that mean the option should have been proposed and sponsored again?
An other interpretation is that if it happens within 24 hours, the period doesn't change. If it doesn't happen within 24 hours it does. I think at least that was the intention, and that is what I did. Kurt
