Hello Andreas,
On 2025-01-15 15:34, Andreas Enge wrote:
...
Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including
when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person
insists
on disapproving? (I am reminded of the European Union where one member
state can effectively hold the others hostage over certain issues.)
The RFC/GCD says: "A team member sending this reply should have made
constructive comments during the discussion period." What if they have
not? How about adding a quorum of "disapprove" votes to have effect?
(Actually in Europe *two* member states are needed for a veto in the
Council.)
I wonder whether the 'political ability' of somebody being able to use
deadlock leavers
should be limited to those who are active/recent members.
Does it seem sensible to have this in place already?
Notice also that the suggestion bootstraps the team members into a
decision taking body - so far we have added people more or less
randomly
to teams. For instance, team members need not have commit rights and
thus be vetted by three fellow committers. So should we replace "team
members" by "committers"? Or keep the proposal as is and immediately
work on a new GCD to somehow safeguard the addition of people to a
team?
Btw, thanks Andreas for your work as Treasurer!
See you in Brussels soon,
Jonathan
