labs-labs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Is Labs using Consensus or Lazy Consensus? [was Request new lab: summarise]
Date Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:55:35 GMT
On 11 June 2013 19:55, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2013, at 6:56 AM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 11 June 2013 13:51, Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:42 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 10 June 2013 00:24, Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Alan Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>
wrote:
>>>>>> I'm confused.  I thought that only a 72 hour lazy consensus was needed
to start a new lab.
>>>>>
>>>>> You're kinda right, lazy consensus, but our bylaws define lazy
>>>>> consensus as "at least three +1 and no -1, 72 hours"[0].  There were
>>>>> only 2 binding +1's in this case...  Given our nature, I was supposing
>>>>> we could just relax the 72 hour bit in this case.   That clear up your
>>>>> confusion?  Personally, I'd be supportive of moving to lazy approval
>>>>> at some point, but that doesn't change the current quandary
>>>>
>>>> That's a strange definition of "lazy" consensus;
>>>
>>> Strange, but clear.  I was simply clarifying the misunderstanding. The
>>> bylaws hint at how to get it changed - just takes someone with the
>>> motivation to do so...
>>
>> Sorry, but it's still not clear to me.
>>
>> AFAICT Labs are using standard Consensus, but for some odd reason are
>> calling it lazy consensus.
>
>
> At Apache, at least three +1 and no -1 is lazy consensus.
>
> At least three +1 and a majority of votes cast is lazy majority.
> I get to say that because I invented the term.
>
> lazy == "at least three affirmative" is the quorum requirement

However the Glossary has a different definition of Lazy Consensus /
Lazy Approval:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus

Also both Incubator and Commons use Lazy Consensus (in the Glossary
sense) for some specific votes.

> If we had some other quorum requirement, like >50% of the PMC
> has to vote before a result can be tallied, then we wouldn't call
> that lazy.  Fortunately, almost everything we need to do can be done
> while being lazy, which is good because I tend to be a slacker.

What you describe here as lazy (>=3 +1, 0 -1) is called Consensus
Approval in the Glossary:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ConsensusApproval

Unfortunately it seems both your (original) definition and the
glossary definition are separately known as lazy.

Not sure how to proceed now.

> ....Roy
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org


Mime
View raw message