kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Jeff Young <jeff@xxxxxxxxx>]

I’d suggest amending that slightly to “requires three lead-dev +1s, and no lead-dev -1s”.  We should encourage others to participate, even if their votes are “non-binding”.

And yes, even at Day management still had the last say. ;)

Cheers,
Jeff.


> On 21 Apr 2019, at 22:12, Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> As long as the only members of the lead development team have voting
> rights and the project leader has veto power than I am fine with this.
> I haven't had to use veto power yet but I am not naive enough to believe
> that there are no circumstances which I wouldn't veto a majority vote.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Wayne
> 
> On 4/21/19 4:03 PM, John Beard wrote:
>> +1
>> 
>> Reminds me of the scoring we used to do code review on Gerrit, with a
>> different threshold. That worked well.
>> 
>> Is there a minimum time to wait for a -1? If a reviewer didn't see the
>> mail before three +1s, their veto is too late. But if they were checking
>> their mail earlier, the veto would count. Since KiCad is a
>> trans-continental team and core people can be busy in real life, slow
>> mail replies can happen.
>> 
>> And also the etiquette for a "delay until I can review properly" veto.
>> If we want people to be free to exercise that ability in good faith
>> without feeling shy about blocking while they check it out, it should be
>> called out as allowed and encouraged.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> On 21 April 2019 20:34:23 BST, Tomasz Wlostowski
>> <tomasz.wlostowski@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>    On 21/04/2019 18:08, Jeff Young wrote:
>> 
>>        In my last few years at Adobe I worked with Day Software in
>>        Switzerland which we had just acquired. They did a lot of
>>        open-source stuff with Apache and had this neat decision-making
>>        scheme (which may have originated at Apache — I’m unaware of its
>>        source):
>> 
>>        If you need direction on something, you send an email to the
>>        list. (This part is no different than what we do today.)
>> 
>>        If someone agrees, they reply with “+1”.
>> 
>>        If someone wants to halt progress until either some discussion
>>        is had or until another direction is chosen they veto with a “-1”.
>> 
>>        When you accumulate three +1s and are clear of -1s you’re good
>>        to go.
>> 
>>        If you do get one or more -1s you’re blocked until those folks
>>        change their input to either a “+0” or a “+1”.
>> 
>>        If you haven’t yet reached three +1s after a time-out period (I
>>        think we used a week but it might have been two), but you are
>>        clear of -1s, you can send a message to the list indicating a
>>        default-consensus and go ahead and implement it.
>> 
>>        Might this be useful for us?
>> 
>>    +1.
>> 
>>    T.
>> 
>>        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>        Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>        Post to : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>        Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>        More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>> 
>>    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>    Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>    Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>    Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>    More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp