On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Bryce L Nordgren <bnordg...@gmail.com> wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Bryce L Nordgren <bnordg...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 4:48 PM > Subject: Re: [Nix-dev] Improving the Developer Experience in the Nix > Community > To: 7c6f4...@mail.ru > > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Michael Raskin <7c6f4...@mail.ru> wrote: >> >> It does look that currently it is unattainable as such on some >> questions. Consensus is good when it is feasible, but with some amount >> of differences it is too much to ask for. > > > Consensus as the only operating rule excludes Nix from the workplace. Nearly > all workplaces have nonnegotiable policies, and it's likely that these will > not be compatible. So there must always be an adaptation layer between a > more or less generic distribution and the specific policies on site. The > adaption layer is bidirectional: the distribution should be prepared to > accept and de-specialize contributions from any particular environment, just > as each participant must be prepared to specialize the generic distribution > to their needs. > > An important part of Consensus is recognizing when it doesn't apply.
The consensus process sounds very interesting to me. I can't think of any particular cases which would infringe on a workplace policy personally. If I understand correctly, the idea is that you vote against (block) things you feel strongly should not happen, so it's just the opposite of a normal voting process where you vote in favor of a proposal. With the normal voting process a decision can be accepted even if some people are strongly against it. With the consensus process everybody doesn't have to agree or think that the solution is the best possible one, it just needs to be the case that nobody is strongly against it. Whether someone has the right to vote with either system is difficult to determine, and a single blocker is more powerful than a single voter so that may make it tricky to apply. I can see why it makes sense for members to be physically present at a meeting to work out differences of opinion. I wouldn't rule it out as an optional decision making process just yet though. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
