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

[Bryan Kearney]

I liked what Brian said, pick the model. Default to change or not. If 
you guys decide to default to change, I agree with Ina that the proposal 
is a +1. So, what would all 0s mean?

-- bk

On 06/12/2017 11:43 AM, Ina Panova wrote:
> 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 
> <mailto: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 <mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com>
>     https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>     <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>