From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31294 invoked by uid 1002); 15 Jul 2003 10:14:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 22642 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2003 10:14:52 -0000 From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 12:14:48 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <20030714214621.33b75fbd.zhen@gentoo.org> <20030715061643.GB8196@lostlogicx.com> <200307150021.29302.ralphdewitt@charter.net> In-Reply-To: <200307150021.29302.ralphdewitt@charter.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Boundary-02=_ZQ9E/BtlkbIdSiT"; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200307151214.49105.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.1 required=5.0 X-Spam-Level: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo part II. X-Archives-Salt: bfee5dd0-a79d-4782-aee4-1477e96a3ebd X-Archives-Hash: 80826e49e9d725aae3977b6a835ddff8 --Boundary-02=_ZQ9E/BtlkbIdSiT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: signed data Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 15 July 2003 09:21, Ralph F. De Witt wrote: > > > References: > > > http://www.debian.org/vote/ (Voting policy) > > > http://www.debian.org/vote/2002/vote_0001 (Sample voting results) > > > http://www.debian.org/vote/howto_vote (Sample voting ballot) > > Who wants voting. I am more than happy filling a bugzilla request for a a= pp > or a bug fix and seeing it happen almost real time with out some voting > processes and having to wait months if it get's enough votes etc. IMHO bad > idea. > I don't think John ever thought about votes for inclusion of ebuilds. There= =20 are however times when "big" decisions need to be made. There are basically= =20 three ways to handle that: =2D Don't make them, and stay goalless =2D Vote, which should ensure more commitment, but could also lead to middl= e of the road solutions =2D Dictate a choice, in this case a choice would either be made by THE lea= der, or by "management".=20 As there are no voting procedures at all, the current situation is that a=20 solution is proposed, people have comments, after which the proposal is=20 addapted. Then either the whole proposal and problem are forgotten about or= =20 someone decides that this is the way to go and gives the go-ahead. The main issue with the current approach is that proposals are forgotten. T= he=20 case with a management decision is not so much a problem as management also= =20 must get the developers along. If it doesn't people walk away and fork Paul ps. Note that zynot has also a management structure in place from the start =2D-=20 Paul de Vrieze Researcher Mail: pauldv@cs.kun.nl Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net --Boundary-02=_ZQ9E/BtlkbIdSiT Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/E9QZbKx5DBjWFdsRApPRAJ9V3jBx+cLwlR3rh2h9YqXJuXCX+QCfR1QH u+6aXIwdFib/jBwYtPotDdQ= =FHuN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_ZQ9E/BtlkbIdSiT--