db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David W. Van Couvering" <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Voting and comments
Date Sat, 22 Oct 2005 00:24:58 GMT
Hi, Kathey.  Sorry if I missed your comments on user impact.  I thought 
I fixed the wording to make it a very strong statement in terms of 
impact and compatibility.  Take a look at the diffs and let me know if 
it's still not a strong enough statement.

Regarding providing a summary, I should have responded to your email, 
but I was concerned about that because I am convinced people will want 
to know exactly what they're voting on, versus voting on it in a 
"general" sense.  I was hoping to hear what others thought but nobody 
else piped in.

Anyway, I posted the request for vote, we'll see how it goes.  If it 
continues to get edited and changed I may go for your recommendation :)

David

Kathey Marsden wrote:
> David W. Van Couvering wrote:
> 
> 
>>I do want to express one frustration with the voting process.  It
>>seems that although I get some feedback, I can't seem to get all the
>>comments I need on a proposal until *after* I call for a vote.  I had
>>this proposal online for over two weeks, and it wasn't until after I
>>called for a vote that I started getting some meaty comments from
>>everyone.
>>
> 
> As for documentation of user impact I did ask for that quite a while ago
> and was waiting #:)  I am still troubled by some of the wording as I
> stated this morning.
> 
> 
>>So that means I have to adjust the proposal and the vote basically has
>>to be rejected.    I really dislike this, I don't like having to have
>>vote after vote as I try to refine the proposal.
>>
>>Does anyone have any ideas how a vote submitter can get the feedback
>>they need *prior* to calling for a vote?  I really would prefer a vote
>>to be a "stamp of approval" on a discussion that has already been
>>worked through.
>>
> 
> I was curious your input on  my suggestion to have a more generalized 
> and clear summary, so that the user impact  is clear, more people can be
> involved and .the implementation details can evolve.
> 
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/db-derby-dev/200510.mbox/browser
> 
> Because your document has a lot of implementation details I am guessing
> it will have to continue to change a lot over time. For instance  if I
> wanted to  add a  parameter to a message I don't know how that would
> work, I guess I would have to version the messages somehow, but I bet
> there are a lot of bridges like that we will have to cross when we come
> to them and I wouldn't want to have to revote on the document if the
> basic guidelines were still met.
> 
> 
> Kathey
> 
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message