incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Husted <hus...@apache.org>
Subject Re: veto stuff
Date Thu, 07 Nov 2002 05:41:47 GMT
I agree with Steve in that the assertions that a "veto cannot be 
overruled" and a "veto must be justified" are contradictory. The 
implication is that a unjustified veto is void, but who decides it 
is void? And in deciding a veto is void, is it not being 
overruled? 

IMHO, the original httpd practices are based on the precept that 
all Committers are sane and reasonable. In general, I think that's 
a fair presumption to make about Apache Committers. =:0) However, 
realisically, the current wording can lead to gridlock when the 
Committers are not quite as sane or quite as reasonable as those 
found on httpd. =:0)

Within Jakarta, one response to a disputed veto is a whiteboard 
revolution. A Committer can fork the code and let Darwin decide. 
If the Community follows the fork, eventually it can be made the 
head.

Of course, relying on revolution to resolve voting disputes seems 
drastic. The simplest thing might be language that specifies a 
veto is subject to a second, a majority vote, or even a super-
majority vote (like overriding a Presidential veto in the United 
States).

For the purposes of the Incubator, we might even be able to 
enumerate several approaches to veto resolution, and each Project 
can decide for themselves. (An "extension point", if you will.)

-Ted.





Mime
View raw message