cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Project Bylaws
Date Thu, 03 Jan 2013 20:55:43 GMT
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 3:52 PM, David Nalley <david@gnsa.us> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 3:39 PM, David Nalley <david@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com>
wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.yadav@citrix.com>
wrote:
>>>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>>> Thanks for the reply, casting binding vote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3. Veteos
>>>>>>>> Who can Veto? Timeframe when a veto is challenged?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The "who" is anyone that can cast a binding vote on an issue.
>>>>>>> Further, veto's are only applicable for "lazy consensus" style
formal
>>>>>>> votes or technical decisions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure I get your timeframe question though…
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The question was if someone challenges a vote by committing a binding
veto -1, and if their veto is challenged (say the reasons were not obvious) and they are asked
for reason(s) what should be the timeline for the person to reply/communicate. (say a case
of someone trolling, the question was about handling trolls :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, I think that the first issue would be that we shouldn't have
>>>>> trolls with binding votes... ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess it's a fair question though...  any thoughts on how to think
>>>>> about that issue?  I'd say that by default, we're talking about the
>>>>> normal "at least 72 hours" standard applying.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand the 72 hour comment.
>>>> Are you talking about period in which casting a veto is possible?
>>>> 72 hours from what? 72 hours from a commit? From a review request?
>>>> I'd guess that anytime up until a release is kicked out would be fine
>>>> for a veto (technical reasons right, even if it is bad form)? (I've
>>>> heard that from Greg Stein anecdotally, but can't find it documented
>>>> anywhere.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> The question was about "how long after the merits of a veto is
>>> challenged should the community wait for a response from the person
>>> vetoing.".  Basically, this is an edge case inside of an edge case
>>> really.
>>
>> See my other response to Rohits question. Valid vetos are binding
>> until withdrawn.
>>
>> --David
>>
>
> Yup - after re-reading the foundation page, you're right.

It's also stated that way in the bylaws you just put up for vote: Section 3.3

Mime
View raw message