couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] The Apache CouchDB Project
Date Wed, 22 May 2013 13:08:28 GMT
That's good clarification Jan!

Dirkjan, "PROPOSAL" is worded that way because they should generally be of
this form:

Dear community,

I would like to do $this_thing_I_think_is_a_good_idea.


Please respond now if you think there is anything to discuss.

You do not need to respond if you are in agreement. If there is no response
> in 72 hours, I will assume lazy consensus and proceed.

i.e. "I propose to do this thing. You have 72 hours to object."

For more "RFC" style stuff, where you're more just wanting to sample the
mood of dev@ and you don't have any particular action in mind for the time
being, DISCUSS would be more appropriate.

(This is the distinction Benoit was driving at, after he missed a few of
the lazy consensus threads.)

I agree with keeping the tags small. I'd sooner use MKTG than "MARKETING",
but that's just me. I think the approach we want to take with this is to
suggest a set of tags/areas for people to use. But then people can
basically use whatever they feel is appropriate. And over time, we document
actual practice. "Paving the cowpaths."

Of course, you're free to ignore the tags, and just use whatever subjects
you like. But I think that if we get good at using tags, it will increase
our ability to communicate, and work productively as a decentralised team.

On 22 May 2013 13:27, Dirkjan Ochtman <> wrote:

> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Jan Lehnardt <> wrote:
> > And again, I think this is very good feedback, keep it coming :)
> Perhaps using less SHOUTY TAGS for some of the more common things
> (like PROPOSAL, which could just be RFC instead) would already be a
> bit better.
> Cheers,
> Dirkjan


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message