On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Ivan Zhakov <ivan_at_visualsvn.com> wrote:
> On 3 November 2014 18:15, Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> > There was some talk in the past about "voting" to keep log-addressing on
> > trunk. To put it bluntly: we don't do that, we've never done that, and I
> > don't want to create a precedent that turns our consensus-based process
> > into a sham.
>
> I think we should follow the decisions made by the community. We have
> decided
> that we should vote for major branches on the Berlin Hackathon, but we
> haven't
>
That is no "decision" because it didn't occur here on the list.
> done that for unknown reason. Then there was at least lazy consensus that
> we should take vote to keep the log-addressing feature in the trunk [1]. I
> do
> not see any good reasons to skip that vote for the second time.
>
As Branko notes, "voting" is not typically done in this community. There
have been only a few in its near-15 year history. I see no reason to change
that now.
For features in our codebase, they stay unless/until somebody vetoes that
feature for some reason. Then it is incumbent upon the person who issued
the veto, to work with the community to *resolve* that veto. That is
*forward* by fixing things to address the reason for the veto.
We use consensus rather than voting, so that we operate as a group rather
than vote-winners and vote-losers. If there is an actual problem that
somebody finds, then we operate as a group to resolve those problems.
>
> Currently we're waiting for notification from stefan2 that all the
> significant
> re-engineering tasks are already done for the log-addressing, the code and
> the
> format are quite stable and we can take the vote. As I can see, the last
> more
>
The code is in trunk. It stays, subject to a veto.
No vote is necessary, nor should one be called for.
Cheers,
-g
Received on 2014-11-06 17:46:18 CET