[Dev] On voting [VOTE]

[Katie Capps Parlante]

So, it sounds like we have a process proposal for chandler.

To be clear, here's my understanding of how this could work for us:

(+) If you want to make a change that requires some coordination and 
consensus, call a vote.
(+) You (the person who calls the vote) will be responsible for making 
the change, unless you can get someone to volunteer to help you out.
(+) Specify a time frame for the vote, or wait 1 business day.
(+) Silence implies consent.
(+) If you are calling for a vote, change the subject line (add [VOTE]) 
to clue people in.
(+) If you disagree with the proposal (-1), you are obligated to offer 
an alternative or otherwise helpful suggestion.

For major design and architectural decisions, we'd still expect a spec 
and more of a review process. We wouldn't use this mechanism to set 
osaf priorities (0.6 feature priorities, for example).

So here I am calling for a vote. ;)

Cheers,
Katie

Alec Flett wrote:
> Ted Leung wrote:
> 
>>
>> In an Apache style project, the person who calls a vote is usually the 
>> one who implements.  
> 
> +1
> I think this is a general open source philosophy - if you whine about 
> it, you fix it.
> 
>> If people start voting, then someone (such as Morgen, in this case) 
>> volunteers to implement once the vote has concluded.
> 
> +1
> 
>>   Votes usually run long enough for people in every timezone to 
>> reply.  In the Apache case, this can be as long as 72 hours, although 
>> on important votes, people usually specify a date by which voting will 
>> conclude.
>>
> +1
> 
> (and chandler/util is fine with me)
> 
> 
> Alec
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> 
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev