Andreas Enge <[email protected]> writes:
Am Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 09:41:58AM +0000 schrieb Steve George:
> process: Anybody can propose to remove anything that still
> builds, but
> the removal does not take place unless consensus is
> reached.
(...)
I don't understand this point. I couldn't find any text about
what happens if there is a dispute about a removal?
If it's not there we should have clarity over handling
disagreements
since the "consensus" word merely means "we should all
agree". It's
also has an assumed, implicit meaning. We don't need a long
definition, it could simply stated that a disagreement between
committers/team members is escalated to the Maintainers, that
would
be explicit and clear.
I would say that this is solved by an "if" clause without an
"else":
If there is consensus, then a PR is prepared and the package
will be
removed; if not the process stops and we keep the package.
I think Steve has a good point here. When talking about GCDs for
example, "consensus" has a rather specific definition[1] where a
single disapproval prevents a proposal from advancing. Andreas,
are you suggesting the same for package removals, or a weaker form
of consensus like "a generally accepted decision"[2]? Also, are
the consensus-reachers limited to project members (like with GCDs)
or is anyone with a Codeberg account welcome to vote? I do think
that a single sentence in the GCD clarifying the intent would
help.
Personally, I don't find it obvious that the same model for
consensus will work equally well for all processes. For example,
with GCDs there are many ways to resolve a disagreement, such as
narrowing the scope of a proposal to address only the issues where
consensus exists. But with a package removal, the scope of the
discussion is fairly rigid and the decision is binary.
Thanks again for your work on this!
Jason
[1] https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus
[2]
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/consensus
