I liked what Brian said, pick the model. Default to change or not. If
you guys decide to default to change, I agree with Ina that the proposal
is a +1. So, what would all 0s mean?
-- bk
On 06/12/2017 11:43 AM, Ina Panova wrote:
Having at least one +1 is not impartial approach just because the
developer who , as you said, found the time for the research and writing
down the proposal obviously will vote as +1 :)
--------
Regards,
Ina Panova
Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
"Do not go where the path may lead,
go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Austin Macdonald <amacd...@redhat.com
<mailto:amacd...@redhat.com>> wrote:
This reminds me of the concept of a "Do-ocracy".
If developers take the time to research and write up a proposal,
they have "done". It seems completely reasonable to default to the
opinion of the people that cared enough to do the work. If it isn't
the right decision, then someone must actively block it, simple as that.
I think the rule should be "PUP passes if we have at least one +1
and no -1s".
_______________________________________________
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com <mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com>
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
<https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>
_______________________________________________
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
_______________________________________________
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
