incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] 72-hour lazy consensus for podling committer + PPMC member votes (was: INCUBATOR-57 aka IPMC votes...)
Date Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:32:05 GMT
Craig L Russell wrote:
> Would it be worthwhile to capture this discussion in a patch to the 
> offending paragraph?

We can capture both sentiments...

> On Jun 27, 2008, at 10:35 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>> I have one small problem, and was otherwise +1 on the final proposed 
>>> text;
>>>> This approach is considered inferior by many because it is a source of
>>>> discord to have a public vote like this fail or take a very long time.
>>> The reason public votes are inferior is that some of the IPMC members 
>>> may
>>> be reluctant to share their private issues or opinions of a prospective
>>> committer on a public forum, period.
>>> There is no other reason for not voting in public.
>> Personally, I generally consider it a bad idea to have discussions of 
>> people in a public forum, a view that I consider reinforced as more 
>> employers turn to scanning the Internet looking for information on 
>> staff or potential staff.

I don't disagree, I'm just stating there's a concrete basis as-policy for
not having public committer votes which is against the interest of the
projects themselves.  I'd make a general statement about discussing merit
or chastising people on public lists, saving those for the private list
or sidebar private criticism to help the individual see how they can
improve their communications on-list.

So both are true, and your point is broader than just commit/ppmc votes.

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

View raw message