couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Antony Blakey <>
Subject Re: [RESULT]: Accept newline patch into CouchDB for 0.9 (Was: Re: VOTE: accept newline patch into CouchDB for 0.9)
Date Tue, 24 Feb 2009 23:05:01 GMT

On 25/02/2009, at 1:40 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:

>> Instead of asking how community votes would be factored into the  
>> final result,
>> you constructed a hypothetical that frames the PMC as a  
>> dictatorship, doing as
>> it pleases regardless of community feedback. You then use this  
>> hypothetical to
>> draw the absurd conclusion that "community votes are irrelevant"  
>> and then seek
>> an explicit refutation.

My framing of this question matches the framing used in the Apache Way  
excerpt that Noah included; to whit:

> However, the basic rule is that only PMC members have binding votes,  
> and all others are either discouraged from voting (to keep the noise  
> down) or else have their votes considered of an indicative or  
> advisory nature only.

This was not an attack on the PMC, and it was not what I was thinking  
when asking that question. It seemed to me that on the surface of it,  
the process didn't match some underlying reality, and this except  
shows that to be true. According to the Apache Way, community votes  
aren't relevant to the outcome, in exactly the sense I meant. And  
considering the purpose of voting, that's a good thing. Apache  
discourages non-PMC members from voting.

I don't see this, or any other issue, as the PMC vs. anyone. This  
project is covered in Apache goodness now.

Antony Blakey
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787

Don't anthropomorphize computers. They hate that.

View raw message