Hi everyone,

I approved the checkasm pull request Niklas posted about 2 hours ago
https://code.ffmpeg.org/FFmpeg/FFmpeg/pulls/22546

I did so in the belief that, after hours of discussion on IRC, we were broadly 
converging on consensus.
Instead of applying that apparent consensus, or first announcing that a vote 
would be started, Niklas opened a vote.

I do not think this vote was started in a proper form.

What I think is wrong with the current vote:
1. It was not formally announced. Searching the mailing list for "POLL" or 
"VOTE" or "ANNOUNCE" finds no such announcement.
2. The set of choices was defined by Niklas, while others had very little time 
to comment. I explicitly said that we needed more time and more discussion.
3. This is a vote about how to integrate checkasm, started by one of the main 
checkasm authors, with checkasm authors also participating in the vote. At the 
very least, that raises a conflict-of-interest question that should be 
addressed explicitly before relying on such a vote.

I think Niklas should rescind the current vote.
A vote should be a last resort after discussion has failed, not a substitute 
for discussion.

If, after proper discussion, people still want a vote, then it should be done 
in a proper and clearly announced way:
1. Formally announce the intent to hold a vote, with "[VOTE]" or "[ANNOUNCE]" 
or similar in the subject.
2. Allow people to propose options and give time for those options to be 
discussed.
3. Once the options are settled, allow time to discuss the actual alternatives 
before voting.
4. Reach agreement in advance on which parties have a conflict of interest or a 
direct stake in the outcome, and how that should be handled.

In my view, this vote should either not happen at all, because we seemed close 
to consensus, or it should be restarted and done properly.

thx

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Dictatorship: All citizens are under surveillance, all their steps and
actions recorded, for the politicians to enforce control.
Democracy: All politicians are under surveillance, all their steps and
actions recorded, for the citizens to enforce control.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to