incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Roy T. Fielding" <>
Subject Re: piling on
Date Sat, 22 Jul 2006 21:12:41 GMT
On Jul 22, 2006, at 1:50 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote:

> no change is necessary - the current policy is sufficient.

Well, no, the expectation is clearly being set that anyone can add
themselves to the proposal on the wiki, and I for one vote to approve
a proposal based on both the wiki and the emailed content.  If the
emailed version is different from the wiki, then that will get a -1
from me simply because they are inconsistent.

> ATM the proposal on the wiki is not normative. the sponsor votes on  
> the
> proposal as submitted to the list. this proposal contains a number  
> of names
> proposed as initial committers. the sponsor votes to accept the  
> proposal
> submitted including the list of initial committers. so, the list of
> committers is specified by the proposer and approved by the sponsor.

In theory, yes,  In practice, no.  A proposer should not be placed in
the position of fighting a wiki-edit war for consistency when it is far
easier for us to tell volunteers to be polite by asking the proposer
for permission before editing *their* proposal.

> what other goals would any new policy have in the area?

Just a small bit of documentation for people preparing a proposal to
inform them that they don't have to accept additional committers during
the proposal process.  There is a serious social disconnect here: people
who are making a proposal are extremely sensitive about pissing us off,
and will tend not to reject an added committer even when they know that
person is not qualified or is deliberately attempting to steer the
project in a direction that it may not want to go.  We need the policy
to protect new proposals from being unduly influenced by our already
established mindset.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message