On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton > <[email protected]> wrote: >> -1 >> >> Hey, a terrific blow for community there, Rob! >> >> Please don't ever do that again for a matter under active discussion. Not >> ever. >> >> I urge you to revert those changes. >> > > I disagree. Bikeshedding on the list is not an impediment to action. > I implemented one of the proposals discussed on the list. It is in > SVN. If someone feels strongly, they can revert. But note that in > CTR, -1's are invalid unless accompanied by technical objections, a > statement of an alternative proposal and a willingness to implement > the alternative. >
Reverting should really be a last resort. I had a technical objection, a statement of an alternative proposal, and a willingness to implement the alternative. Granted, I didn't actually say "-1", but I still think it's pretty poor show. Consensus is not "who commits first, wins", and meaningful discussion that's still ongoing less than 48hrs after you made your proposal hardly constitutes "bikeshedding". I'm going out now, but I hope we can see a little more collaboration and a little less bulldozing in the future. Noirin
