On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 at 09:17, Carsten Haitzler <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 08:15:48 -0400 Mike Blumenkrantz > <[email protected]> said: > > > Hello, > > > > We've just completed our first round of voting ( > > https://phab.enlightenment.org/T7283). The process was a success overall, > > what on earth.... a success overall? how can you claim this? 2 polls. 1 had > one > vote, one had 2 votes. in total 3 votes. they don't allow multiple choices. > the > voting against was confusing to 50% of the people voting... and tbh i voted > only for the lease bad option because i disliked them all...
I agree the voting was a bit weird. And I think there should only be a vote against a proposal if a consensus cannot be reached. People could just comment on the proposal task there if they are against it. I only see a need for voting if one wants to know what other developers would like to have the most for the next release. > > Q: Why proposals? > > A: Previously, EFL releases were like a giant pile of unrelated and > > uncoordinated work. There was no oversight and nobody knew what anyone else > > was doing. This methodology provides solutions to these issues and allows > > for a framework within which contributors can work cooperatively on > > features for each release. > > yet the community was happy and functioned. we got along like friends. had our > arguments and spats but functioned. I think that is where most people would argue that it is/was not functioning. Maybe it was before, but it looks like it isn't anymore... > i for one will happily approve any patches/work that is of value and has been > done well that is brought to my attention. proposal or not (if it's a patch > submitted). if someone wanted to add something they needed or wanted and it > was > not proposed - more power to them. they are enjoying themselves doing what > they > wanted. if someone wants to add something that was not proposed, it is fine! Just communicate about it... they can say "hey I am working on this, what do you think" that is just more communication right? I think this is what proposals are for. But like I said before I don't see why there should be a voting session against the proposals. There should be good reasons to be against a proposal first. voting seems too arbitrary. > a todo list for people to pick from if they are short on ideas or see things > there they'd prefer to work on is what is useful. this bureaucracy is not. i > am > seriously disliking where you want to push things and consider this a big push > back. I think it is more or less what we agreed before in irc meetings, isn't it? maybe I've missed some. If you have a big feature that will change efl it seems normal to have a task (proposal) to discuss about it. (and small features do not need proposals) For example if there had been a proposal for the gadgets you could have said from the start you were against it (maybe you did and I missed it) instead of when it landed. Because they did what you described exactly, they worked on something they wanted and merged it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
