On 11.06.2015 09:39, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > I tend to agree with Valentin. This is a change that will affect the whole > project, and one of the cases where voting makes sense in my view.
So what if it affects the whole project? Many code changes are like that, and you for sure are not going to vote on them in advance. What do you intend to do if someone votes -1? Or if somebody doesn't vote? Are you going to declare that the vote failed and stay with the current process? Or are you going to ignore the -1 vote and implement the new process despite the fact that you're clearly going to piss off someone who actually took the time to voice their opinion? -- Brane > > D. > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Valentin Kulichenko < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Actually this silence is my main concern here :) >> >> We're going the change the process. And everyone in the community has to >> move to the new process at the same time. I have nothing against consensus >> concept, but IMHO there should be some formal indicator. Such a vote (if we >> do not apply majority rules to it) can be one of them - when the vote is >> closed, decision is made. Are there other options? >> >> -Val >> On Jun 11, 2015 12:03 AM, "Branko Čibej" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 11.06.2015 01:47, Valentin Kulichenko wrote: >>>> Hmm. I'm not sure I understand. As far as I understand, any vote here >>>> is unanimous, but not majority. I.e., if anyone in community has >>>> objections, vote is declined (already not a democracy, right? :) ). If >>> so, >>>> I really don't see any difference between "consensus is recorded by no >>>> objections >>>> being raised" and "consensus is recorded by the vote being passed". >>> See again re "silent consensus". It's an informal process. Voting is >>> formal and by definition implies that the majority rules. Consensus >>> implies something else entirely. A -1 vote can be overridden by others. >>> An objection during silent consensus process cannot. >>> >>> -- Brane >>> >>>
