incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Majority vs Lazy Majority
Date Tue, 19 Nov 2013 11:15:29 GMT
well that type of "lazy majority" is really a "majority of binding votes
cast with a quorum" which differs from "majority of binding votes cast",
"majority of votes cast" and "quorum" (i.e. the needs 3x+1 to release...
because remember you cannot veto releases ;-) though only a fool of a
release manager would go ahead with a release when there are a lot of
binding -1 votes cast )


On 19 November 2013 09:28, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org>wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:52 AM, David Crossley <crossley@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> >> ..."lazy majority" is mentioned at
> >> http://ant.apache.org/bylaws.html but I didn't know there was such a
> >> concept in our projects.
> >
> > Many projects use it. See this Google search:
> >  site:apache.org "Lazy Majority"
>
> I stand corrected then.
>
> >
> > We use it at Forrest:
> > http://forrest.apache.org/guidelines.html
>
> And define it there as "a lazy majority vote requires 3 binding +1
> votes and more binding +1 votes than -1 votes".
>
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html mentions majority twice,
> and in both cases it is clear to me a majority there is defined as the
> Forrest guidelines define "lazy majority".
>
> So I don't see a need for the term "lazy majority". No need to change
> in existing projects bylaws or guidelines, but IMO we should keep it
> simple for the incubator.
>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message