Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flex.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@flex.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy includes SPF record at
 spf.trusted-forwarder.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Subject: Re: Project voting guidelines
From: Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
In-Reply-To: <CEA03064.10DB9%aharui@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2013 13:01:17 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <83562980-7B9B-406E-97A8-D74ACAA034E4@classsoftware.com>
References: <CEA03064.10DB9%aharui@adobe.com>
To: dev@flex.apache.org

Hi,

> Is there a reason why you are proposing Lazy forms of voting for most
> actions?
Because that's generally the Apache default for voting in committers, =
PMC members etc etc. Although it does vary somewhat with projects with =
guidelines/bylaws. Being able to veto the voting in of a committer or =
PMC member seems reasonably important (to me anyway). Otherwise it could =
be little more than a popularity or voting bloc contest - not that that =
has happened yet. As always a valid veto needs a good reason.

>  I kind of like seeing how many folks vote +1 and who they are.
> Doesn't Lazy essentially only solicit vetos?
Hasn't stopped people voting +1 or +0 on previous consensus votes we've =
taken.

> Can you check whether it should be "[VOTE][RESULT]" or
> "[RESULT][VOTE]"=20
Will do.

Thanks,
Justin=