On 02/01/2009, at 11:07 PM, Chris Anderson wrote:
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 4:16 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Jan 2, 2009, at 12:33 AM, Antony Blakey wrote:
It's never been clear to me that there is a process for voting - the
decision making process within the commit group seems opaque.
How can that be? I assume that all decisions are made in public on
the dev@
mailing list.
The committers have a history of deferring to Damien (especially on
deeply technical matters like the document identity model). It's fair
to say that most of what we do is bug fixes and the like. When we have
a new feature or module under development, we like to run the code by
Damien before we commit it. He understands CouchDB inside and out, and
he's pretty good at seeing how an API detail or caching property will
effect the big picture of how people use CouchDB.
That would confirm my presumption that it's probably a waste of time
pushing something that Damien's firmly against, as opposed to
expecting to vote on it.
There have been votes on the dev list before, but they are rare
because we so often move with consensus.
I'm merely curious bout this, but now that Couch is formally an Apache
project, is there some Apace mandated consensus-driven decision making
approach, or do they accept whatever model comes in - I'm wondering if
the ASF brand might 'mean' something in that sense. And I've just
noticed that Geir is on the ASF board - he should know if anyone does!
Antony Blakey
-------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a
faithful servant. We have created a society that honours the servant
and has forgotten the gift.
-- Albert Einstein
