incubator-couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benoit Chesneau <bchesn...@gmail.com>
Subject [DISCUSS] dont't abuse of "lazy concensus" on mail tagged [DISCUSS]
Date Tue, 07 May 2013 19:07:54 GMT
I would like to discuss about the lazy concensus here.

Side notte: I already read http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html thanks.

So these votes happend quite often this last 4 months either in
@private or @dev ml, and I'm quietly becoming very annoyed by them.
Especially when they expect a response in less than a week ( I would
say month).

Lazy consensus give this false idea that because no-one objected in
time then it's OK to process. That could be true if the expected
response was not in a short delay or asked before a we, or... Actually
it can be asked before a we, or at any time, but we have to understand
that sometime our  time isn't the time of other: in some countries
that can be the holidays, bank days or some of us can be busy for any
reason, some of us also disconnect at certain times. Other have a lot
of email to handle per day with mostly the same priority.

So I think that something tagged [DISCUSS] should at least let 2 weeks
or better 1 month to expect a response and make any assumption. At
least if noone still answer then the person that answered could take
its own responsibility and consider it as a yes .

I reckon that some lazy concensus need an urgent response (though i
doubt a lazy concensus is enough in that case) so I propose

If nonone object I would like to push the delay of such discussion to
2 weeks by default . Also i really would like that such concensus
should be optionnal not a common thing to use to pass ideas. This
isn't natural at all.

- benoit

Mime
View raw message