On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 8:39 PM David Roe <roed.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Addressing a comment from Travis > <https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/IgBYUJl33SQ/m/CCKJ0dVCAAAJ> on > the voting thread: > > "but might want to consider cases when its 2 vs 1 as requiring at least > one other person involved. (Sorry for being late to realize this.)" > > This border case was actually one of the reasons that I suggested a 2 to 1 > threshold. I think that if a single objector thinks that a PR should not > proceed and the author and reviewer both think it should, the onus should > be on the objector to find other developers who share their objections. > As long as the issue of GitHub blocks is not resolved, this issue is moot. A developer can block their opponents on GitHub to make sure there is not enough opposition to their PRs. David > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 10:53 AM Dima Pasechnik <dimp...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 11:29 AM Giacomo Pope <giacomop...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Apologies for the basic question in this thread, but recently I have >>> seen lots of conversation about the different labels and I want to clarify >>> something for myself. >>> >>> In the past few PR I have made for Sage, randomised testing has >>> uncovered (usually) trivial bugs. I then write new PRs to fix these bugs. >>> >>> If there is code causing CI failure in random testing, should I mark the >>> fix for this as a "blocker", even if the chance of this failure is small? I >>> don't want to be melodramatic in my PR for fixes but I also want to make >>> sure I'm labelling things as expected, >>> >> >> I don't think we ever tag anything but most onerous maths bugs as blockers >> (e.g. we have a plenty of outstanding symbolic integration bugs). >> That is, unless it's absolutely Earth-shuttering, don't use "blocker". >> >> Dima >> >> >>> >>> On Wednesday, February 28, 2024 at 6:08:20 AM UTC David Roe wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 1:01 AM Kwankyu Lee <ekwa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thank you for making progress on these urgent issues. I suggest the >>>>> following: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Open two other new threads, each of which is for voting on each >>>>> proposal. >>>>> 2. On a proposal, it should be clear that *a positive vote (+1) is >>>>> for the whole proposal,* and if one is negative to any part of the >>>>> proposal, (s)he should give a negative vote (-1). >>>>> >>>> >>>> Voting threads seem reasonable. I'll wait a day or two to see if >>>> people have any final comments before voting. >>>> >>>> >>>>> 3. A proposal is accepted if the number of positive votes is at least >>>>> twice of the number of the negative votes. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Despite the fact that we're asking for this threshold in voting on a >>>> PR, the standard for votes on proposals on sage-devel is just a plain >>>> majority (though of course I hope that we can come to a 2-1 consensus!). >>>> >>>> A minor suggestion for Proposal 2: for the label to be readable, I >>>>> suggest "CI fix" for the name of the label (a blank between words). >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'm happy to adjust the label to be "CI fix." >>>> >>>> >>>>> We may use this thread to get more comments on the Proposals before >>>>> opening voting threads. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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+...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/554961a0-4ace-4317-bfcf-55b6a128bcden%40googlegroups.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/554961a0-4ace-4317-bfcf-55b6a128bcden%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- >>> 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/b84b22d2-9b57-460c-9f8d-5f8ebe2f982en%40googlegroups.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/b84b22d2-9b57-460c-9f8d-5f8ebe2f982en%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- >> 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/CAAWYfq2eMM%3DzUHCZ_dpfDvxattotQmaD-0kht6J8ZxCL9K005w%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAAWYfq2eMM%3DzUHCZ_dpfDvxattotQmaD-0kht6J8ZxCL9K005w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- > 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/CAChs6_nR1T2CtkD%2BEY7AHFDU5Y4TE0u1WUeWZ9crVkbhLt4%2Byg%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAChs6_nR1T2CtkD%2BEY7AHFDU5Y4TE0u1WUeWZ9crVkbhLt4%2Byg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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/CAAWYfq2GzgDA1i8kZ7X%2BgxtofLUej7ZUc2eXEnAX750fCekmSQ%40mail.gmail.com.
