On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 4:48 PM Gregory Nutt wrote: > >> Democracy as we see today is vulnerable to manipulation by "mass > >> migration". I saw many good open-source projects being hurt by "new > >> fancy trends" to the point where solid old developers left the project > >> and it was taken over by the "progress is achieved by enforcing > >> changes"^TM* folks simply removing or breaking stuff that has been > >> there for years and worked well. > > In all Apache projects, decisions are made a democratic vote by members > of the PPMC (Podling Project Management Committee): +1 = in favor, -1 = > opposed, 0 = no opinion. Normally votes have some hysteresis to avoid > wild changes; normally 3 more +1 votes than -1 votes are required to get > a change through. So it is basically a democratic but one that requires > close to unanimous agreed. > > Hmm... actually I just checked. That is not true for code modifications > as we are talking about here. One -1 vote is a veto and blocks the code > change: "A -1 vote by a qualified voter stops a code-modification > proposal in its tracks. This constitutes a veto, and it cannot be > overruled nor overridden by anyone." > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html . We have not been > following that rule. > > I would probably vote -1 on most code modifications that do not clearly > benefit the community or that cause excessive turbulence.
Thank you Gregory! Rules seems to be written down already :-) This -1,0,+1 seems reasonable scale. -1 veto also seems sensible assuming voter can change it to 0 or +1 after requested modifications are introduced. At least 3x +1 to accept change is also very good option. The "qualified voter" to veto may need some more explanation because it does not seem to be described in detail who exactly is the "qualified voter". As stated in Binding Votes section "Who can vote is, to some extent, a community-specific thing. PMC members have formally binding votes, but in general communities encourage all their members to vote, even if their votes are only advisory.". Being member of PMC / PPMC seems to be the kind of Voting Rank I was describing.. except it is more bureaucratic / social based rather than result based.. because it depends on the membership rather than overall lines of code added to the project.. on the other hand input to the project may be the door opener to PMC :-) Assuming core developers are PMC and everyone else can also vote, while PMC can veto, then solution seems to be in place already :-) -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
