Hi,
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 17:10, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> 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?
>
> This is a general question about consensus building.
I agree.
> Perhaps the “Decision Making” section could stress that, with a
> paragraph above “To learn …” along these lines:
>
> Consensus building requires that participants share a common goal,
> trust each other to act in good faith, listen to one another’s
> concerns to take them into account, and are committed to donating
> enough of their time to achieve it.
To me, this paragraph would be redundant with this other paragraph:
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
> A deliberating member who “insists on disapproving”, without proposing
> alternative paths, wouldn’t meet these requirements.
Yes and I think that already included in the paragraph above, no?
> I believe right now people who become team members or committers have
> already demonstrated these abilities. I think this is where these
> expectations should be clarified and agreed upon.
It’s also my point of view.
As we clarified over the time the expectations for Committers, Reviewing
the work of others, etc. I think we need another GCD in order to
document these expectations.
Cheers,
simon
