On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > The only mention of consensus I could find is in the actual development of > the actual > proposal. I’m sure one could argue that that implies that whether consensus > is achieved > is by the vote, but with a group as large as the IPMC it would be horrible to > allow a > single vote to block a podling from entering.
Right. But imagine if INFRA representative cast -1 because we don't have resources to accommodate the poddling will we still use simple majority? To me this highlights a very fundamental problem with an incubator: give the size of the PMC if we start allowing simple majority to just "happen" without any semblance of trying to address concerns by a compromise of some sorts -- we're running a significant risk of never EVER be able to say NO to a podling when we need to. I have not seen folks proposing Impala considering any compromise that would alleviate concerns that were articulated by -1 votes. I see a lot of 'this is our way -- we don't want to change' attitude. That is *precisely* why I personally cast a -1, btw. Now, if you're looking for ideas on how a compromise would look like things like inviting more diverse set of mentors, etc may be a good place to start (I'm obviously brainstorming here). Thanks, Roman. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
