well that type of "lazy majority" is really a "majority of binding votes cast with a quorum" which differs from "majority of binding votes cast", "majority of votes cast" and "quorum" (i.e. the needs 3x+1 to release... because remember you cannot veto releases ;-) though only a fool of a release manager would go ahead with a release when there are a lot of binding -1 votes cast )
On 19 November 2013 09:28, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org>wrote: > Hi David, > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:52 AM, David Crossley <cross...@apache.org> > wrote: > > Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > >> ..."lazy majority" is mentioned at > >> http://ant.apache.org/bylaws.html but I didn't know there was such a > >> concept in our projects. > > > > Many projects use it. See this Google search: > > site:apache.org "Lazy Majority" > > I stand corrected then. > > > > > We use it at Forrest: > > http://forrest.apache.org/guidelines.html > > And define it there as "a lazy majority vote requires 3 binding +1 > votes and more binding +1 votes than -1 votes". > > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html mentions majority twice, > and in both cases it is clear to me a majority there is defined as the > Forrest guidelines define "lazy majority". > > So I don't see a need for the term "lazy majority". No need to change > in existing projects bylaws or guidelines, but IMO we should keep it > simple for the incubator. > > -Bertrand > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
