On 8/12/2014 4:03 PM, Michael Still wrote:
This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concern that I don't know
what step five looks like... What if we can never reach a consensus on
an issue?
Michael
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin <mar...@redhat.com> wrote:
Hey
(Terrible name for a policy, I know)
From the version_cap saga here:
https://review.openstack.org/110754
I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations
like this.
Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the
procedure to be:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy
If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the
"Development policies" doc.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Just thinking out loud, you could do something like a 2/3 majority vote
on the issue but that sounds too much like government, which is
generally terrible.
Otherwise maybe the PTL is the tie-breaker?
--
Thanks,
Matt Riedemann
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
