Anton Khirnov (12024-02-18): > A non-maximalist interpretation would be that a TC member is only > excluded from voting when they authored the patch that is being > disputed.
If the rules were meant to be interpreted that way, they would have been written “if the patch was proposed by a member of the TC“, not “if the disagreement involves a member of the TC”. The world is “involves”, its meaning is inherently maximalist. > Anything handled by the TC is a disagreement. Then according to your > interpretation, any TC member who expressed an opinion on a patch > (either positive or negative) becomes a party to the disagreement and > cannot vote. Exactly: you were part of this disagreement, you should recuse yourself. > That is absurd and makes no sense. That makes absolute sense, unless you consider your opinion is worth more than the opinion of the other people in the project. A spot on the TC is not a license to consider one's opinion above the other's, and therefore comes with a trade-off, and it is exactly that. There are other members of the TC who did not take part in the discussion: recusing yourself is not an issue. Sitting on the TC is a duty, a responsibility to examine in details changes one do not care about to make an informed decision. Somebody who sees it as a means to power rather than a responsibility should be evicted as soon as possible. -- Nicolas George _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
