incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <>
Subject Re: veto stuff (was: Code ownership)
Date Thu, 07 Nov 2002 03:20:42 GMT
--On Thursday, November 7, 2002 2:51 AM +0100 Stephen McConnell 
<> wrote:

> Ok, so if I'm the subject of a veto that I consider is invalid on
> that grounds that no rational justification was provided, what
> should one do to resolve the situation.  According to Jakarta law
> the rationale "my girfriend has a headache" is a rationale - but is
> it an acceptable rationale?  As soon as you enter a situation where
> a veto is irrationale - your in undefined territory.

In HTTP Server, AIUI, a veto can be 'challenged' and at least one 
other voting member must agree that the *technical reason is valid*, 
then the veto stands.  Otherwise, it is nullified.  This acts as a 
safeguard against blantantly invalid vetos.  (Not entirely sure if 
this is codified somewhere, but I believe we follow this procedure.)

FWIW, it doesn't mean that the other person agrees with the veto, but 
there must be one other person who says it is a valid technical 
reason - that's it.  Even if I'm subject to a veto, I'll usually 
recognize the other person's technical argument and won't bother 
challenging it.  The veto is meant to force a compromise.

Sometimes, if it is a matter of direction rather than a technical 
reason (which is what your situation seems to have been based on my 
limited knowledge), HTTP Server tends to subject it to a majority 
vote rather than a veto (dueling vetoes are no fun).  For example, we 
have choice A and choice B.  What do we do?  I recall a situation 
between Ryan and Greg that was handled like this (OLD_WRITE, IIRC). 
That may or may not have been before my time.  =)  -- justin

View raw message