On 02/01/2009, at 11:07 PM, Chris Anderson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 4:16 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 2, 2009, at 12:33 AM, Antony Blakey wrote:
>>>
>>> It's never been clear to me that there is a process for voting - the
>>> decision making process within the commit group seems opaque.
>>
>> How can that be? I assume that all decisions are made in public on
>> the dev@
>> mailing list.
>>
>
> The committers have a history of deferring to Damien (especially on
> deeply technical matters like the document identity model). It's fair
> to say that most of what we do is bug fixes and the like. When we have
> a new feature or module under development, we like to run the code by
> Damien before we commit it. He understands CouchDB inside and out, and
> he's pretty good at seeing how an API detail or caching property will
> effect the big picture of how people use CouchDB.
That would confirm my presumption that it's probably a waste of time
pushing something that Damien's firmly against, as opposed to
expecting to vote on it.
> There have been votes on the dev list before, but they are rare
> because we so often move with consensus.
I'm merely curious bout this, but now that Couch is formally an Apache
project, is there some Apace mandated consensus-driven decision making
approach, or do they accept whatever model comes in - I'm wondering if
the ASF brand might 'mean' something in that sense. And I've just
noticed that Geir is on the ASF board - he should know if anyone does!
Antony Blakey
-------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a
faithful servant. We have created a society that honours the servant
and has forgotten the gift.
-- Albert Einstein
|