Added RTC Policy
Added +2 ... -2 scheme for votes
Clarified lazy consensus (tallying and lazy voting)
Added Informal Votes/Surveys
Added Project Team Leadership role and Decision making
Added Community Decisions with Funding and Legal Implications
Changed Project Wide Decision making: per project b
On 12/09/16 17:20, Lars Kurth wrote:
> Added RTC Policy
> Added +2 ... -2 scheme for votes
> Clarified lazy consensus (tallying and lazy voting)
> Added Informal Votes/Surveys
> Added Project Team Leadership role and Decision making
> Added Community Decisions with Funding and Legal Implications
>
On 13/09/2016 17:46, "George Dunlap" wrote:
>On 12/09/16 17:20, Lars Kurth wrote:
>> Added RTC Policy
>> Added +2 ... -2 scheme for votes
>> Clarified lazy consensus (tallying and lazy voting)
>> Added Informal Votes/Surveys
>> Added Project Team Leadership role and Decision making
>> Added Com
Lars Kurth writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] Significant changes to decision making;
some new roles and minor changes"):
> I could, but it isn't really that long. And it makes life hard for me, as
> there is only one file. Thus breaking it into bits and maintaining the
> changes is hard in git.
Are you
On 19/09/2016 15:01, "Ian Jackson" wrote:
>Lars Kurth writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] Significant changes to decision
>making; some new roles and minor changes"):
>> I could, but it isn't really that long. And it makes life hard for me,
>>as
>> there is only one file. Thus breaking it into bits and
Lars Kurth writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] Significant changes to decision making;
some new roles and minor changes"):
> Almost everyone else has reviewed this series already: Jan, Stefano, Wei,
> Tim and I think Konrad.
> That leaves you and George amongst the committers: so I am not sure
> whether t
Lars Kurth writes ("[PATCH v2 3/3] Significant changes to decision making; some
new roles and minor changes"):
> [proposal]
Thanks. I've reviewed this and it looks generally good but I have
some specific comments.
Throughout you use "gage" where I think you should use "gauge".
(AFAICT from Wik
On 20/09/2016 18:01, "Ian Jackson" wrote:
>Lars Kurth writes ("[PATCH v2 3/3] Significant changes to decision
>making; some new roles and minor changes"):
>> [proposal]
>
>Thanks. I've reviewed this and it looks generally good but I have
>some specific comments.
>
>
>Throughout you use "gage"