On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com> wrote:
> On 3 November 2014 18:15, Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com> wrote: > > There was some talk in the past about "voting" to keep log-addressing on > > trunk. To put it bluntly: we don't do that, we've never done that, and I > > don't want to create a precedent that turns our consensus-based process > > into a sham. > > I think we should follow the decisions made by the community. We have > decided > that we should vote for major branches on the Berlin Hackathon, but we > haven't > That is no "decision" because it didn't occur here on the list. > done that for unknown reason. Then there was at least lazy consensus that > we should take vote to keep the log-addressing feature in the trunk [1]. I > do > not see any good reasons to skip that vote for the second time. > As Branko notes, "voting" is not typically done in this community. There have been only a few in its near-15 year history. I see no reason to change that now. For features in our codebase, they stay unless/until somebody vetoes that feature for some reason. Then it is incumbent upon the person who issued the veto, to work with the community to *resolve* that veto. That is *forward* by fixing things to address the reason for the veto. We use consensus rather than voting, so that we operate as a group rather than vote-winners and vote-losers. If there is an actual problem that somebody finds, then we operate as a group to resolve those problems. > > Currently we're waiting for notification from stefan2 that all the > significant > re-engineering tasks are already done for the log-addressing, the code and > the > format are quite stable and we can take the vote. As I can see, the last > more > The code is in trunk. It stays, subject to a veto. No vote is necessary, nor should one be called for. Cheers, -g
