Interesting. Foundation-wise, all our votes are Majority Voting (new member vote, board vote (ish), votes by the board themselves, omnibus voting). There's little expectation/requirement of consensus.
Jakarta/Commons wise new committer votes felt that way (Majority); however both of those were large PMCs. Disagreement was more likely than on a smaller PMC so the reality was that we needed Majority instead of Consensus. The mantra was always "votes on code (technical) had veto, everything else was majority". But it was also, to your point, a strong culture to avoid relying on majority-overrule of a veto. Thus new release votes always felt like Consensus voting even if the rule says Majority voting. I think the release voting ( https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes ) is similar to new committer votes. It's Majority Voting, but the Release Manager does hold a veto. I'd expect a PMC Chair to have a similar role in a new committer vote. "As Chair I consider the -1 from Alice to be a blocking veto; we need to discuss more". That doesn't work with Podlings though as there's no (local) buck-stops-here chair. It feels like there's an inconsistency between https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html and https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html . Either we update newcommitter.html to explain that it's a Majority vote, but explain how unusual it should be to see -1 after discussion; or voting.html needs updating to explain that most (or all?) projects use Consensus voting to add committers (and presumably PMC members too). On most projects using consensus voting for committers/pmc; it feels that it's hard to tell the difference. If there are no -1s, a consensus and majority vote look the same. :) Hen On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:48 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Way back when each project having a set of bylaws/guidelines was > fashionable I looked through them and there is some variation but a -1 on a > committer or PMC member is generally treated as a veto. That being said any > objections should really come up in the discussion stage (and hopefully > mitigated) before a vote is called so a -1 vote should be rare. If you look > at [1] [2] you see that consensus voting allows for a veto (with a reason) > and AFAIK most projects use consensus approval when adding committers/PMC > members. It may be some don’t realise this as a -1 has never come up. > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > 2. https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ConsensusApproval > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
