+1 -- ,,,^..^,,,
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 12:07 AM, Robert Samuel Newson <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > > On 28 Jul 2014, at 20:28, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks folks. >> >> I added it here: >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=44302833&selectedPageVersions=3&selectedPageVersions=2 >> >> We are now voting on the following changeset: >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=44302833&selectedPageVersions=3&selectedPageVersions=1 >> >> (Apologies for the in-situ edit!) >> >> People who vote after this email: PLEASE CONFIRM YOU UNDERSTAND AN >> EDIT WAS MADE. Thanks. It's important to be rigorous here. :) >> >> On 28 July 2014 21:16, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> เมื่อ วันอังคารที่ 29 กรกฎาคม ค.ศ. 2014, Joan Touzet <[email protected]> >>> เขียนว่า: >>> >>>> Noah asked me to clarify what I mean here. >>>> >>>> I vote +1, with the understanding that the clarification he has listed >>>> below is the intent of the rule. >>>> >>>> -Joan >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Joan Touzet" <[email protected] <javascript:;>> >>>> To: [email protected] <javascript:;> >>>> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 1:28:26 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Amend CouchDB bylaws >>>> >>>> With this modification, I concur. +1 on these changes, and thanks for >>>> getting this and the minor errata from others merged into a single vote >>>> so promptly! >>>> >>>> -Joan >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Noah Slater" <[email protected] <javascript:;>> >>>> To: [email protected] <javascript:;> >>>> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 12:58:49 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Amend CouchDB bylaws >>>> >>>> Dang. Where I say that a -1 never has the power to block a vote, I >>>> really mean a *single* -1 vote. Of course, -1 votes can still block a >>>> vote if you have enough of them. The point is that they're not vetos >>>> >>>> I don't think this is enough for me to abort the vote, as the rules >>>> are quite clear in the approval models section. This only serves as a >>>> clarification of the statement that a -1 vote is not *called* a veto >>>> outside of RTC. >>>> >>>> If you think this is important enough to restart the vote, I shall do so. >>>> >>>> In the mean time, I have created an Errata document: >>>> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COUCHDB/Errata >>>> >>>> On 28 July 2014 18:25, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote: >>>>> Sensible. Thanks for catching this! >>>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Jan >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>>> On 28.07.2014, at 16:55, Noah Slater <[email protected] <javascript:;>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hello folks, >>>>>> >>>>>> In a discussion between myself, Joan, and Bob on IRC today, it became >>>>>> clear that there are some major errors that need fixing ASAP. >>>>>> >>>>>> Here's my candidate doc that we are voting on: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=44302814 >>>>>> >>>>>> This vote uses majority approval model and expires in 72 hours. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please review and cast your vote. >>>>>> >>>>>> The page history is messy, but here is a list of the changes I made, >>>>>> in order of importance. The last half are a wrap-up of all the >>>>>> outstanding errata. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Dropped "majority approval" approval model, as this allowed blocking >>>>>> -1 votes on non-technical decisions. Confirmed with other major >>>>>> contributors to the bylaws that this did not match our intentions >>>>>> >>>>>> - Updated decision table to use "lazy majority" or "lazy 2/3 majority" >>>>>> instead of "majority approval" as necessary >>>>>> >>>>>> - Clarified that "veto" only applies to -1 votes using RTC >>>>>> >>>>>> - Change our most preferred method of decision making to "Lazy >>>>>> consensus or RTC" per Bob's feedback that we actually have two primary >>>>>> decision making models, one for code and one for everything else >>>>>> >>>>>> - Dropped a redundant sentence about the Chair not being a leader >>>>>> >>>>>> - Changed "RTC Approval & Vetos" to "RTC and Vetos" so anchors work >>>>>> >>>>>> - Fixed internal anchors, and added a few additional ones >>>>>> >>>>>> - Added example about using email TAGS >>>>>> >>>>>> - Tightened up wording about the PMC delegating responsibility >>>>>> >>>>>> - Minor fixes for wording and case >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Noah Slater >>>>>> https://twitter.com/nslater >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Noah Slater >>>> https://twitter.com/nslater >>>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Noah Slater >> https://twitter.com/nslater >
