I would like to discuss about the lazy concensus here. Side notte: I already read http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html thanks.
So these votes happend quite often this last 4 months either in @private or @dev ml, and I'm quietly becoming very annoyed by them. Especially when they expect a response in less than a week ( I would say month). Lazy consensus give this false idea that because no-one objected in time then it's OK to process. That could be true if the expected response was not in a short delay or asked before a we, or... Actually it can be asked before a we, or at any time, but we have to understand that sometime our time isn't the time of other: in some countries that can be the holidays, bank days or some of us can be busy for any reason, some of us also disconnect at certain times. Other have a lot of email to handle per day with mostly the same priority. So I think that something tagged [DISCUSS] should at least let 2 weeks or better 1 month to expect a response and make any assumption. At least if noone still answer then the person that answered could take its own responsibility and consider it as a yes . I reckon that some lazy concensus need an urgent response (though i doubt a lazy concensus is enough in that case) so I propose If nonone object I would like to push the delay of such discussion to 2 weeks by default . Also i really would like that such concensus should be optionnal not a common thing to use to pass ideas. This isn't natural at all. - benoit
