[Pulp-dev] PUP Process: "obvious consensus"

[Ina Panova]

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 <amacdona at 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 at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20170612/4b8456f0/attachment.htm>