On 11 June 2013 21:55, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11 June 2013 19:55, Roy T. Fielding <field...@gbiv.com> wrote: >> On Jun 11, 2013, at 6:56 AM, sebb wrote: >> >>> On 11 June 2013 13:51, Tim Williams <william...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:42 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 10 June 2013 00:24, Tim Williams <william...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Alan Cabrera <l...@toolazydogs.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> I'm confused. I thought that only a 72 hour lazy consensus was needed >>>>>>> to start a new lab. >>>>>> >>>>>> You're kinda right, lazy consensus, but our bylaws define lazy >>>>>> consensus as "at least three +1 and no -1, 72 hours"[0]. There were >>>>>> only 2 binding +1's in this case... Given our nature, I was supposing >>>>>> we could just relax the 72 hour bit in this case. That clear up your >>>>>> confusion? Personally, I'd be supportive of moving to lazy approval >>>>>> at some point, but that doesn't change the current quandary >>>>> >>>>> That's a strange definition of "lazy" consensus; >>>> >>>> Strange, but clear. I was simply clarifying the misunderstanding. The >>>> bylaws hint at how to get it changed - just takes someone with the >>>> motivation to do so... >>> >>> Sorry, but it's still not clear to me. >>> >>> AFAICT Labs are using standard Consensus, but for some odd reason are >>> calling it lazy consensus. >> >> >> At Apache, at least three +1 and no -1 is lazy consensus. >> >> At least three +1 and a majority of votes cast is lazy majority. >> I get to say that because I invented the term. >> >> lazy == "at least three affirmative" is the quorum requirement > > However the Glossary has a different definition of Lazy Consensus / > Lazy Approval: > http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus > > Also both Incubator and Commons use Lazy Consensus (in the Glossary > sense) for some specific votes.
And it's used here: http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#LazyConsensus >> If we had some other quorum requirement, like >50% of the PMC >> has to vote before a result can be tallied, then we wouldn't call >> that lazy. Fortunately, almost everything we need to do can be done >> while being lazy, which is good because I tend to be a slacker. > > What you describe here as lazy (>=3 +1, 0 -1) is called Consensus > Approval in the Glossary: > http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ConsensusApproval > > Unfortunately it seems both your (original) definition and the > glossary definition are separately known as lazy. > > Not sure how to proceed now. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscr...@labs.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: labs-h...@labs.apache.org
