incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: veto stuff
Date Fri, 08 Nov 2002 01:38:04 GMT
> Ok - so is it reeasonable to say that one cannot invoke a veto via a 
> CVS commit message?

You write that in a tone that suggests if Jim say's "Nope" your going 
to run off to some other venue and say "see, look here - it says you 
can't do that".

I'd say that not the usual way to veto, but I do recall occasional 
cases were a veto first raised it's ugly face in a commit that reverted 
something.  I don't think I recall any cases where that wasn't followed 
up by a more verbose explanation in the dev@ list.

Historically we attempted to avoid voting in HTTPD, and still do to a 
large extent.  Even in Robert's Rules of Order voting is the end of 
debate, and since we have tended to find the discussion useful some of 
us have tried to lean toward less severe devices; such as: "This is 
making me uncomfortable, can we discuss it some more?"  [this one 
almost always works] or "Damn, I don't like that can you back it out?" 
[sadly that one rarely seems to work].

Veto, and even votings, are pretty crude, cooperative groups shun them.

I'm a huge fan of Roy's recent comment that people tend to avoid 
conflict and thrash around looking for something to substitute - 
somebody in charge, a rule, a process, stagnation.  None of these tend 
to be very good substitutes for doing the hard work of resolving the 
conflict.  What has impressed me has been how often the conflict 
resolution has hammered out a more useful durable outcome.  What's the 
rush?

  - ben


Mime
View raw message