incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: Majority vs Lazy Majority
Date Sat, 23 Nov 2013 14:29:21 GMT
On 19 November 2013 08:29, Bertrand Delacretaz <> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 4:03 PM, sebb <> wrote:
>> On 9 November 2013 12:17, Justin Mclean <> wrote:
> ...
>>> My guess is that "Lazy Majority" is used because Majority implies more than 50%
of possible voters need to vote.
>> My guess is that it is a misprint for Lazy Consensus....
> I'd say so - "lazy majority" is mentioned at
> but I didn't know there was such a
> concept in our projects.

The Ant bylaws do at least define what the terms mean [1], but
unfortunately it seems they have chosen different names from the ones
in the ASF Glossary [2]

For example:

Ant has
Consensus: For this to pass, all voters with binding votes must vote
and there can be no binding vetoes (-1). Consensus votes are rarely
required due to the impracticality of getting all eligible voters to
cast a vote.

ASF has:
'Consensus approval' refers to a vote (sense 1) which has completed
with at least three binding +1 votes and no vetos. Compare Majority

Lazy Consensus: Lazy consensus requires 3 binding +1 votes and no
binding vetoes.

Lazy consensus(Also called 'lazy approval'.):  A decision-making
policy which assumes general consent if no responses are posted within
a defined period.

This is a bit of a mess.


> I'd rather keep it simple and avoid mentioning it in the incubator docs.
> -Bertrand
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message