Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > So there are no hard rules, and this is not a democracy. For the most > part the community runs itself in an open and collective fashion, and > the dictator's job is easy; but ultimately, he or she is in charge of > what gets applied and what doesn't. Rules like "break ties in favor of > reviewers" are just a guideline for the dictator to use in making > decisions. > > I do not think any of that is news to you, but I think the point needs > to be made, as it applies to any concrete rules.
My original draft had "I am hoping we do not have to come to that" after "(I heard some communities break ties this way)", but I removed it by mistake. And I think you are right. I also am hoping that I am being fair to dictate ;-) > -Peff > >  Note that I think a benevolent dictator is a _terrible_ way to run a > real government, but it works in an open source project. I think the > difference is that dictatorship is open to abuse of power. In the > real world, there is a lot of power to abuse, and it is hard for > people to opt out of it. In the open source world, there is not that > much power, and if there is a bad dictator everyone can go somewhere > else (another project, or even a fork). So while a dictator _can_ > play favorites, or start deciding which patches to take based on > what they had for breakfast, there is a real incentive to remain > fair and reasonable. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html