> While I strongly support the shift to github, I also agree with Travis > that we should vote on a change this major, and give the community enough > time to weigh in. I would also encourage people on both sides of the > debate to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. To those who have been > putting in a ton of work attempting to fix trac in recent weeks, our broken > infrastructure is both frustrating and gives a sense of urgency. To those > who have spent over a decade using trac, the most recent iteration of this > discussion (starting four days ago) feels very rushed. >
Well said on both counts. > Consensus ?! Hmm - consensus means that everyone is for. I don't think we will have it. So we can stop now, no? I think a simple majority is a meaningful way to vote here. I think that's been the historical practice (recall the document William refers to in the Bernoulli # thread, which I think said something like at least 5 or 10 total votes + majority, though I also no longer know where it resides), but it probably wouldn't hurt to ask for a 2/3 majority to work against buyer's regret (see Saari's Basic Geometry of Voting for a nice historical example of this still in use) since that is as close to a "true" consensus we are likely to achieve here. Or at least a 2/3 majority of "Yes" and "Won't oppose" combined, since I find myself in the latter camp - and I think with continued careful discussion of the technical challenges of keeping Trac alive combined with continued concrete proposals for how to most safely transition to GH (GL?) that won't be a problem to get. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/51062568-886c-495e-9672-cce4d702de80n%40googlegroups.com.
