+1 I think best to phrase is for threads that have no on-going discussions, and all trailing replies are either looks good to me or +1s.
On 2024/10/30 19:30:49 Mike Carey wrote: > +1 for this change. (We may just want to be sure we only do this for > things where there isn't ongoing discussion like UPDATE, where we're > still finalizing the exact syntax based on input from the dev > community? I'm not sure how to phrase that - e.g., "if the discussion > is clearly positive and there aren't open issues"? I would characterize > UPDATE's discussion as positive but still converging on the final details.) > > On 10/30/24 10:23 AM, Ian Maxon wrote: > > Hi all, > > There has been a great influx of APEs lately, and that is wonderful to see. > > I also think many of them are not very controversial; the discussion thread > > is pretty much just +1 or agreement on the feature being a great addition. > > > > When the PMC voted on adopting the APE process in 2023, the process we > > agreed on was having a [DISCUSS] thread and then a [VOTE] thread. I think > > this is overkill in the case where the change is clearly a shoo-in. I > > therefore propose the process be amended such that: > > - IF the discussion is clearly positive after 72 hours, AND > > -the change is not breaking or deprecating existing functionality, AND > > -3 or more PMC members have expressed positive sentiment at the change > > > > the APE is by default accepted. > > > > Thoughts? > > -Ian > >
