On 2024-02-23 01:26 pm, Nicolas George wrote:
Anton Khirnov (12024-02-22):
In my updated proposal, based on comments by Niklas and Rémi, I'm
leaving it up to the TC member in question, based on the assumption that
TC members are honest.
A "stronger" version could conceivably leave it to CC to decide
ambiguous cases. Feel free to propose such a version if you prefer it.
Your version does nothing to address the issue of the current situation,
where the contributor who has to raise an issue in front of the TC does
not trust one member of the TC to be unbiased on this issue.
Just to be clear, that's not my basis.
I said,
"As a TC member who is part of the disagreement, I believe your
participation is recused."
based on the existing rule,
"If the disagreement involves a member of the TC, that member should
recuse themselves from the decision"
Disagreement implies the existence of opposing sides, so discussion
members from both sides are barred from the TC proceedings.
The wiggle room in interpretation is over whether 'involves' captures
all participants, including minor ones, or just the principal interlocutors.
Note that the rule says nothing about patch authorship or asymmetry in
its application.
Anton's original disagreement, as I understand it, is about the
propriety of the rule i.e. he believes that pre-existing public
opposition (or agreement) on the issue should not bar a TC member.
That's a disagreement with the rule, not with its interpretation.
Regards,
Gyan
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
