incubator-couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randall Leeds <randall.le...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] dont't abuse of "lazy concensus" on mail tagged [DISCUSS]
Date Fri, 10 May 2013 20:23:00 GMT
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
> On 10 May 2013 20:39, Randall Leeds <randall.leeds@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So I'd prefer to see [DISCUSS] and [URGENT] used and just be mindful
>> that discussion suggests ample allotment of time for discussion. I
>> don't believe we need a specific tag for lazy consensus because I
>> agree with you that it's the default operating mode.
>
>
> Randall,
>
> My only issue here is that I think "URGENT" misses the mark also.
>
> There are several community / project-level things that one might want to
> do where all you really ought to do is notify dev@ that you're about to do
> it. Some examples I can think of:
>
> * Big changes to the website
> * Big changes to the wiki
> * Changes in stuff like release procedure
> * Archiving releases
> * Planning marketing activity
> * Getting approval for small events
> * Getting branding approval
>
> There are plenty more.
>
> So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm more than happy only using
> "DISCUSS" to mean "here's an open ended discussion", but I want a tag that
> means "here's something I'm about to do".
>
> I agree that we don't need a specific tag for lazy consensus, simply
> because lazy consensus is the default. But if "DISCUSS" is causing some
> people to think "oh well, I'll read that next week when I have time" then
> it would be handy to be able to explicitly tag a thread with "this is
> something that is about to happen, so speak up now". And I don't think
> "URGENT" is the right tag. Because archiving a release isn't urgent. But I
>  _will_ be moving ahead if I don't hear any objections about it. Do you see
> what I mean?

Yes. If it's something worth bringing up to the list at all, and it's
not urgent, then maybe one should wait longer than 72 hours before
moving ahead.

I know it's a small increase in workflow burden to keep a loop open for longer.

How about [NOTICE]? You use that sometimes. What exactly do you use it
for? That sounds a bit to me like "you should read this, but I'm not
expecting discussion". Perhaps that's a better tag for this sort of
thing than [DISCUSS]?

Mime
View raw message