On 10/9/07, Paul Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 9-Oct-07, at 2:10 PM, Christopher Schmidt wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 01:50:56PM -0400, Paul Spencer wrote: > >> I'm ambivalent on this. I am not convinced that we need unanimity > >> (?) on any given issue, but I do think we need everyone to vote so > >> that we are certain there are no dissenting votes. I also think > >> there may be a certain amount of pressure felt by someone that they > >> have to vote with the rest of the PSC even though they are not > >> necessarily fully supportive (or even just ambivalent). > >> > >> Discuss ... :) > > > > I think that license changes are important enough that if you can't > > get > > unanimous approval of the PSC, then "You're doing it wrong"[1]. > > > > That said, I would consider a "+0" to be part of a 'unanimous vote' -- > > indicating no veto -- and since a single -1 vetoes a vote nayway, the > > practical change to this would only be that all members would have to > > vote. However, now that I think about it, I think all PSC members > > really > > should be voting "+1" to change a license. If you can't get that > > level of > > approval, then you shouldn't be changing the license.c > > > > > > [1] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/macjinx/campingmacro.jpg > > nice :) > > I agree on anything with a + being part of a unanimous vote. I think > we are (or at least just I am) abusing the current rules by voting +1 > on everything even if we (I) don't intend to help out. > > The PSC needs to maintain a list of things that we have agreed > (unanimously) require a unanimous vote.
http://trac.openlayers.org/wiki/SteeringCommittee?action=diff&version=8 > Also, I think we should maintain a record of the results of votes. > The way MapGuide runs their PSC. An RFC is prepared in the wiki, a > link is forwarded to dev for discussion, then after a suitable > waiting period a motion to vote is presented by a PSC member. After > the vote, the proponent of the RFC updates the list with the voting > record. For issues like this one, this seems like a bit of overkill > but at least the main text of the RFC and the voting history could be > plunked into the wiki after a vote? How do people feel about this? In the past, there have been very few issues which have required a vote -- the majority of the voting has just been for releases so far. If others are interested in this public log of voting, though, I would be happy to set up some wikistructure to handle it. :-) Erik > > And +1 on making unanimity (all + votes) for this particular issue. > > Cheers > > Paul > > +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ > |Paul Spencer [EMAIL PROTECTED] | > +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ > |Chief Technology Officer | > |DM Solutions Group Inc http://www.dmsolutions.ca/ | > +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
