[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC] Minor change to governance document at http://www.xenproject.org/developers/governance.html

> On 28 Apr 2016, at 19:26, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> wrote:
>> Any views?
> Looks good!

Alright, I guess there seems to be enough consensus to set up a formal vote.

According to http://www.xenproject.org/governance.html#formal-votes ...

Sometimes it is necessary to conduct formal voting within the community 
(outside of elections). Formal votes are necessary when processes and 
procedures are introduced or changed, or as part of the Project Governance. Who 
is eligible to vote, depends on whether the scope of a process or procedure is 
local to a sub-project or team, or whether it affects all sub-projects (or in 
other words, is global).

... this change affects all mature projects and thus XAPI folks would need to 
be included. I am going to set this up, but because of the overhead of setting 
this up, I am wondering whether I should wrap this up with some other changes, 
which have been discussed before (but not fully in public). Obviously, I will 
send out separate RFCs (see "Housekeeping list" below).

= Housekeeping list =

On my house-keeping laundry list we have:
* I am also wondering whether we should make explicit our Review-Then-Commit 
policy, referring to the MAINTAINERS file (or the equivalent for other 
* Clarifying Lazy Consensus : when, who (taking into account meritocracy) and 
how plus an example - I recall that because this document was changed 
iteratively, the lazy consensus part is not clearly explained and it also got 
mixed up with voting (which was not intentional). This would support the recent 
changes in the MAINTAINERS file. 
* Changing the voting scale: aka add -2, +2 to the current scale of -1, 0, +1, 
  +1 : a positive vote
   0 : abstain, have no opinion
  -1 : a negative vote
  would change to
  +2 : I am happy with this proposal, and I will argue for it
  +1 : I am happy with this proposal, but will not argue for it
   0 : I have no opinion
  -1 : I am not happy with this proposal, but will not argue against it
  -2 : I am not happy with this proposal, and I will argue against it
  Right now, we do have a veto model, by which any -1 kills a proposal. The 
implication of the above is that only a -2 kills a proposal.
  This would fix the issue, where someone wants to record an objection, without 
blocking a vote.
* Clarify the tallying of formal votes (both local and global), in line with 
what we have done in the past: 
  a simple majority, if there is no veto. With the introduction of -2, this may 
need a little bit of thought
  Partly this means moving some text from "Consensus Decision Making" to 
"Formal Votes"


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.