Mart Raudsepp <[email protected]> posted 1240508221.2635.18.ca...@localhost, excerpted below, on Thu, 23 Apr 2009 20:37:01 +0300:
> I think the whole council should understand why something received a > "no" from someone, as they might be important technical (or subjective) > arguments against having that in EAPI-3 > It is quite likely that almost all features will get a majority "yes" > vote when taken individually because not all council members have seen > the problems a few of the council members have. [T]he whole of the > council should consider the objections of an individual council member, > so that potentially bad things don't end up accepted based on some kind > of an uninformed majority vote or concensus. [Noting that this is now after the meeting...] While you bring up a worthwhile point, keep in mind that based on previous council discussion the current vote is preliminary -- the idea being to select a set of features that the council would like in EAPI-3 for the PM folks to work on, then set a goal date for implementation. At that date, the intent is that the council will take a look at what has actually been implemented and how, checking any implementation problems that occurred in the process, and /then/ vote a final yea or nay on individual EAPI-3 features. Since they will have already been implemented in test-EAPI form (with ebuilds using the non-final features not allowed into the tree until EAPI-3 is finalized with those features in it), once the vote is in, it should be a simple matter of flipping a switch turning on an approved EAPI-3. Thus, while knowing the individual reasons now, for the preliminary vote, may prevent work on features ultimately voted down and thus is a good thing, it's not the end of the world if the current vote fails to take into account a valid objection. In fact if my read is correct, that's one reason the council decided to do it this way. It prevents voting in a standard that's difficult to implement, thus avoiding imposing potentially difficult or impossible mandates on an after all volunteer work force, with all the practical ugliness that entails. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
