Re: [Kicad-developers] A neat decision-making scheme

2019-04-21 Thread Jeff Young 
I’d suggest amending that slightly to “requires three lead-dev +1s, and no 
lead-dev -1s”.  We should encourage others to participate, even if their votes 
are “non-binding”.

And yes, even at Day management still had the last say. ;)

Cheers,
Jeff.


> On 21 Apr 2019, at 22:12, Wayne Stambaugh  wrote:
> 
> As long as the only members of the lead development team have voting
> rights and the project leader has veto power than I am fine with this.
> I haven't had to use veto power yet but I am not naive enough to believe
> that there are no circumstances which I wouldn't veto a majority vote.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Wayne
> 
> On 4/21/19 4:03 PM, John Beard wrote:
>> +1
>> 
>> Reminds me of the scoring we used to do code review on Gerrit, with a
>> different threshold. That worked well.
>> 
>> Is there a minimum time to wait for a -1? If a reviewer didn't see the
>> mail before three +1s, their veto is too late. But if they were checking
>> their mail earlier, the veto would count. Since KiCad is a
>> trans-continental team and core people can be busy in real life, slow
>> mail replies can happen.
>> 
>> And also the etiquette for a "delay until I can review properly" veto.
>> If we want people to be free to exercise that ability in good faith
>> without feeling shy about blocking while they check it out, it should be
>> called out as allowed and encouraged.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> On 21 April 2019 20:34:23 BST, Tomasz Wlostowski
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>On 21/04/2019 18:08, Jeff Young wrote:
>> 
>>In my last few years at Adobe I worked with Day Software in
>>Switzerland which we had just acquired. They did a lot of
>>open-source stuff with Apache and had this neat decision-making
>>scheme (which may have originated at Apache — I’m unaware of its
>>source):
>> 
>>If you need direction on something, you send an email to the
>>list. (This part is no different than what we do today.)
>> 
>>If someone agrees, they reply with “+1”.
>> 
>>If someone wants to halt progress until either some discussion
>>is had or until another direction is chosen they veto with a “-1”.
>> 
>>When you accumulate three +1s and are clear of -1s you’re good
>>to go.
>> 
>>If you do get one or more -1s you’re blocked until those folks
>>change their input to either a “+0” or a “+1”.
>> 
>>If you haven’t yet reached three +1s after a time-out period (I
>>think we used a week but it might have been two), but you are
>>clear of -1s, you can send a message to the list indicating a
>>default-consensus and go ahead and implement it.
>> 
>>Might this be useful for us?
>> 
>>+1.
>> 
>>T.
>> 
>>
>> 
>>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
>>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>> 
>>
>>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
>>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>> 
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] A neat decision-making scheme

2019-04-21 Thread Wayne Stambaugh 
As long as the only members of the lead development team have voting
rights and the project leader has veto power than I am fine with this.
I haven't had to use veto power yet but I am not naive enough to believe
that there are no circumstances which I wouldn't veto a majority vote.

Cheers,

Wayne

On 4/21/19 4:03 PM, John Beard wrote:
> +1
> 
> Reminds me of the scoring we used to do code review on Gerrit, with a
> different threshold. That worked well.
> 
> Is there a minimum time to wait for a -1? If a reviewer didn't see the
> mail before three +1s, their veto is too late. But if they were checking
> their mail earlier, the veto would count. Since KiCad is a
> trans-continental team and core people can be busy in real life, slow
> mail replies can happen.
> 
> And also the etiquette for a "delay until I can review properly" veto.
> If we want people to be free to exercise that ability in good faith
> without feeling shy about blocking while they check it out, it should be
> called out as allowed and encouraged.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> John
> 
> On 21 April 2019 20:34:23 BST, Tomasz Wlostowski
>  wrote:
> 
> On 21/04/2019 18:08, Jeff Young wrote:
> 
> In my last few years at Adobe I worked with Day Software in
> Switzerland which we had just acquired. They did a lot of
> open-source stuff with Apache and had this neat decision-making
> scheme (which may have originated at Apache — I’m unaware of its
> source):
> 
> If you need direction on something, you send an email to the
> list. (This part is no different than what we do today.)
> 
> If someone agrees, they reply with “+1”.
> 
> If someone wants to halt progress until either some discussion
> is had or until another direction is chosen they veto with a “-1”.
> 
> When you accumulate three +1s and are clear of -1s you’re good
> to go.
> 
> If you do get one or more -1s you’re blocked until those folks
> change their input to either a “+0” or a “+1”.
> 
> If you haven’t yet reached three +1s after a time-out period (I
> think we used a week but it might have been two), but you are
> clear of -1s, you can send a message to the list indicating a
> default-consensus and go ahead and implement it.
> 
> Might this be useful for us?
> 
> +1.
> 
> T.
> 
> 
> 
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 
> 
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] A neat decision-making scheme

2019-04-21 Thread Jeff Young 
Good questions, John.

At Day, the use of a veto was a rare occurrence.  So it wasn’t used for “give 
me a minute”.  Which is not to say that their usage was right or wrong, but it 
did work for them.

Generally speaking you’d only give a +1 if you had thought it through.  So in 
practice if three people gave a +1 it would pretty unlikely for someone else to 
veto.  

And of course someone could always come along later and say “oh shit, wait a 
minute…” (in fact it might even be someone who had previously given a +1).  The 
scheme is just meant to speed up the normal course of things.

Cheers,
Jeff.


> On 21 Apr 2019, at 21:03, John Beard  wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
> Reminds me of the scoring we used to do code review on Gerrit, with a 
> different threshold. That worked well. 
> 
> Is there a minimum time to wait for a -1? If a reviewer didn't see the mail 
> before three +1s, their veto is too late. But if they were checking their 
> mail earlier, the veto would count. Since KiCad is a trans-continental team 
> and core people can be busy in real life, slow mail replies can happen.
> 
> And also the etiquette for a "delay until I can review properly" veto. If we 
> want people to be free to exercise that ability in good faith without feeling 
> shy about blocking while they check it out, it should be called out as 
> allowed and encouraged.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> John
> 
> On 21 April 2019 20:34:23 BST, Tomasz Wlostowski  
> wrote:
> On 21/04/2019 18:08, Jeff Young wrote:
> In my last few years at Adobe I worked with Day Software in Switzerland which 
> we had just acquired.  They did a lot of open-source stuff with Apache and 
> had this neat decision-making scheme (which may have originated at Apache — 
> I’m unaware of its source):
> 
> If you need direction on something, you send an email to the list.  (This 
> part is no different than what we do today.)
> 
> If someone agrees, they reply with “+1”.
> 
> If someone wants to halt progress until either some discussion is had or 
> until another direction is chosen they veto with a “-1”.
> 
> When you accumulate three +1s and are clear of -1s you’re good to go.
> 
> If you do get one or more -1s you’re blocked until those folks change their 
> input to either a “+0” or a “+1”.
> 
> If you haven’t yet reached three +1s after a time-out period (I think we used 
> a week but it might have been two), but you are clear of -1s, you can send a 
> message to the list indicating a default-consensus and go ahead and implement 
> it.
> 
> Might this be useful for us?
> +1.
> 
> T.
> 
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers 
> 
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers 
> 
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp 
> 
> 
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers 
> 
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers 
> 
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp 
> 

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] A neat decision-making scheme

2019-04-21 Thread John Beard 
+1

Reminds me of the scoring we used to do code review on Gerrit, with a different 
threshold. That worked well. 

Is there a minimum time to wait for a -1? If a reviewer didn't see the mail 
before three +1s, their veto is too late. But if they were checking their mail 
earlier, the veto would count. Since KiCad is a trans-continental team and core 
people can be busy in real life, slow mail replies can happen.

And also the etiquette for a "delay until I can review properly" veto. If we 
want people to be free to exercise that ability in good faith without feeling 
shy about blocking while they check it out, it should be called out as allowed 
and encouraged.

Cheers,

John

On 21 April 2019 20:34:23 BST, Tomasz Wlostowski  
wrote:
>On 21/04/2019 18:08, Jeff Young wrote:
>> In my last few years at Adobe I worked with Day Software in
>Switzerland which we had just acquired.  They did a lot of open-source
>stuff with Apache and had this neat decision-making scheme (which may
>have originated at Apache — I’m unaware of its source):
>> 
>> If you need direction on something, you send an email to the list. 
>(This part is no different than what we do today.)
>> 
>> If someone agrees, they reply with “+1”.
>> 
>> If someone wants to halt progress until either some discussion is had
>or until another direction is chosen they veto with a “-1”.
>> 
>> When you accumulate three +1s and are clear of -1s you’re good to go.
>> 
>> If you do get one or more -1s you’re blocked until those folks change
>their input to either a “+0” or a “+1”.
>> 
>> If you haven’t yet reached three +1s after a time-out period (I think
>we used a week but it might have been two), but you are clear of -1s,
>you can send a message to the list indicating a default-consensus and
>go ahead and implement it.
>> 
>> Might this be useful for us?
>+1.
>
>T.
>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>> 
>
>
>___
>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] A neat decision-making scheme

2019-04-21 Thread Tomasz Wlostowski 
On 21/04/2019 18:08, Jeff Young wrote:
> In my last few years at Adobe I worked with Day Software in Switzerland which 
> we had just acquired.  They did a lot of open-source stuff with Apache and 
> had this neat decision-making scheme (which may have originated at Apache — 
> I’m unaware of its source):
> 
> If you need direction on something, you send an email to the list.  (This 
> part is no different than what we do today.)
> 
> If someone agrees, they reply with “+1”.
> 
> If someone wants to halt progress until either some discussion is had or 
> until another direction is chosen they veto with a “-1”.
> 
> When you accumulate three +1s and are clear of -1s you’re good to go.
> 
> If you do get one or more -1s you’re blocked until those folks change their 
> input to either a “+0” or a “+1”.
> 
> If you haven’t yet reached three +1s after a time-out period (I think we used 
> a week but it might have been two), but you are clear of -1s, you can send a 
> message to the list indicating a default-consensus and go ahead and implement 
> it.
> 
> Might this be useful for us?
+1.

T.

> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] A neat decision-making scheme

2019-04-21 Thread Jon Evans 
+1
:-)

On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 12:08 PM Jeff Young  wrote:

> In my last few years at Adobe I worked with Day Software in Switzerland
> which we had just acquired.  They did a lot of open-source stuff with
> Apache and had this neat decision-making scheme (which may have originated
> at Apache — I’m unaware of its source):
>
> If you need direction on something, you send an email to the list.  (This
> part is no different than what we do today.)
>
> If someone agrees, they reply with “+1”.
>
> If someone wants to halt progress until either some discussion is had or
> until another direction is chosen they veto with a “-1”.
>
> When you accumulate three +1s and are clear of -1s you’re good to go.
>
> If you do get one or more -1s you’re blocked until those folks change
> their input to either a “+0” or a “+1”.
>
> If you haven’t yet reached three +1s after a time-out period (I think we
> used a week but it might have been two), but you are clear of -1s, you can
> send a message to the list indicating a default-consensus and go ahead and
> implement it.
>
> Might this be useful for us?
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp