Steven Noels wrote:
Voting should be made a requirement for _releases_ IMHO.
...and other "important decisions", subject to "common sense". For example: - major non-incremental design changes
if consensus exist: dunnow
otherwise: +0.5
is voting a method of gauging consensus? or should we install some flame metering instead? :-)
- branching
+1
- public API changes, in particular if other Apache projects are known to be affected (should they have a vote too? :-)
Oh sure, why not. ;-)
Seriously: I really don't know. Avalon is kind enough to check on Cocoon prior to changing APIs we depend on, but I regard that as a very kind courtesy and as such, I value this much more than when they would do the same just because of rules and regulations. I like it when people are doing Good Things without being expected to do so.
My nitpicking was based on the _required_ votes. I think we should have as little required votes as possible. Informal consensus gauging by exchanging +1/-1 are already part of our life and vocabulary. (I sometimes even see myself replying to customer emails with only "+1" in the body if I'm OK with what they said.)
Totally OT: as a non-native English speaking guy, I've been smiling today because of the similarity between 'vote' and 'veto'. There's some beautiful coinciding tongue-in-cheek humor behind that, especially if you look at recent discussions on some lists. But I'm digressing... ;-)
</Steven> -- Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/ stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------- In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
