On 12/08/2016 14:01, "Jan Beulich" <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 12.08.16 at 14:53, <lars.ku...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 12/08/2016 13:41, "Jan Beulich" <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 12.08.16 at 01:13, <lars.ku...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> +### Lazy Consensus {#lazyconsensus}
>>>> +
>>>>[snip]
>>>> +
>>>> +Objections by stake-holders should be expressed using the
>>>>[conventions
>>>> +above](#expressingopinion) to make disagreements easily identifiable.
>>>> +
>>>> +__Passed/Failed:__
>>>> +
>>>> +- Failed: A single **-2** by a stake-holder whose approval is
>>>>necessary
>>>> +- Failed: **-1**'s by all stake-holder whose approval is necessary
>>>> +- Passed: In all other situations
>>>
>>>Hmm, that means all -1's except a single 0 would already be a pass?
>>
>> That is not the intention. If we have only -1's and 0's it should be a
>> fail.
>> Let me fix this in the next revisions.
>>
>> How about:
>> +- Failed: Only **-1** or **0** votes by all stake-holder whose
>>approval
>> is necessary
>
>That would still leave 10 -1's overruled by a single +1.
>
>> Although maybe someone can come up with a clearer way to express this.
>
>Maybe when there are no +2's, simply take the sum of all votes,
>and require it to be non-negative?
That would work. Any other opinions?
Lars
_______________________________________________
Xen-api mailing list
Xen-api@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api
