Hi, On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The current tally is extremely close (9 +1 vs. 8 -1 binding) >> I don't want to close an issue with such a small margin. > > I suggest that we should not change policy on anything like this lack of > concensus.
IMHO this issue needs to be resolved one way or another as even the current policy is undocumented and confusing. A negative result on this vote will also serve to clarify the position of the IPMC. The IPMC already has 85 members and I'm afraid this is probably just the first example of an issue where we will not be able to form consensus through discussion. Consensus doesn't scale, and we need to find ways to deal with that. Adopting and accepting majority rule is IMHO one key element in dealing with growth. Yes, it'll change community dynamics, but I can't see a way around that without decreasing the size of the the community. A big issue with majority votes (and the key reason why I wanted to extend the vote period) is legitimacy of the decisions when a large part of binding votes are not cast. To increase confidence that the result of this vote reflects the wishes of the IPMC as a whole, I'd appreciate more IPMC members to cast their votes. Even an explicit 0 vote is better than silence. I appreciate that majority decisions without clear community consensus are a new aspect at Apache, and it would be best to discuss the ramifications and related rules when there is no active vote ongoing. I'll be following up on this at members@ once the dust settles, and until that I'm ready to table this issue if more votes won't made the result clearer. BR, Jukka Zitting --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
