Stephen Lau wrote:
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Eric Boutilier wrote:
Some people have asserted or implied that although support for this
proposal is not easily discernable, nevertheless it is there, and
therefore
the proposal passes per current policy.
I agree and think we should move it along, which means that the next
step
is a post (by me, as usual) acknowledging that the proposal has been
seconded, followed by initiating the project web space.
Any objections?
given that there were objections and suggestions for using an existing
community how do we deal with that ?
I think what you are saying is that as long as there is one +1 it
cancels all -1's, that just isn't fair.
But that's the current project approval policy, for better or for worse.
Personally I see that there is no point in the approval policy as it
stands because it doesn't count anything but positive comments if the
original submitter sticks to their proposal and
Ben Rockwood and I have been bouncing back ideas for a new project
approval policy.. I'll try to send it out today.
Great. A simple sum would do the trick for me as an improvement over
what we have, ie if there are more +1's than -1's the pluses win. I'm
sure there could be some further improvement though that gave some
better weight based on input from community leaders where the project
would line up with (if any existed).
I'm not trying to put up barriers to projects but if there is no way an
objection can be raised that has an impact we might as well change
direction and not have any "seconding" procedure at all and have project
creation completely automatic. Which might be a good thing.
--
Darren J Moffat
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
