community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: How can we support a faster release cadence?
Date Mon, 10 Feb 2014 13:48:22 GMT
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 10, 2014, at 6:50 AM, Rob Vesse <rvesse@dotnetrdf.org> wrote:
>> With a large enough PMC likely there will be enough active people to
>> obtain the necessary +1's in the 12hr window regardless of a few people
>> being unavailable
>
> A concern is that if the same person is RM, and the vote is always
> done at the same time (and so the 12 hour window never shifts, time-
> wise) then the vote will *always* favor those who are in the
> timezone of that vote.
>
> One reason for the 72hour rule is to ensure that no PMC
> member feels disenfranchised... not all PMC members are in
> the same timezone and not all PMC members should be assumed
> to be paid to work on the code (and thus available 24/7
> as it were). Longer vote times handle those cases.
>
> PMCs are *inclusive*. The processes and procedures are
> designed to maintain that inclusivity.
>

A PMC will only adopt this procedure if it *inclusively* decides to
adopt this procedure. if PMC members feel excluded from the release
decision-making process, they can bring it to a halt at the process
level. A project can adopt a policy rotating the RM role around the
globe. Any PMC member can add any automated test that stops the
process if his or her testing concerns are not met.

In other words, an automated process can still allow for completely
inclusive participation.

Mime
View raw message