Hi, I think we should continue to discuss and develop our understanding of what "consensus decision-making" means for this project. It would be nice to do that on a thread that isn't connected to this GCD so that the two areas aren't intertwined.
Steve / Futurile On 5 May, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On 2025-05-05, Leo Famulari wrote: > > On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 06:12:25PM -0700, Felix Lechner via Development of > > GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution. wrote: > >> [...] the other, but the standard for approval seems high. > > > > Yes, the standard could not be higher, but this is a consensus process, > > not a democratic process. By definition, the choice must be unanimous. > > Consensus does not require unanimous approval, only the lack of strong > dissent, though *ideally* with strong and broad approval. > > Technically, it could be any mix of people declaring "I support" and "I > accept" as long as nobody declared "I disapprove". > > In general it might be a red flag if it is overwhelmingly "I accept" > vs. "I support" and that should be considered during the implementation > phase (presuming no "I disapprove" declarations). My take is that it > depends on the stakes weather strong approval is important; something > that heavily impacts many people to a large degree might really need > very strong approval, whereas relatively minor impacts where someone is > providing the enthusiasm and work to implement might skirt by with > general acceptance. > > I declared "I accept" because while I saw merit in it moving forward, I > did recognize some unresolved issues raised by others. Some people did > declare "I disapprove" in this case, so the decision did not pass > muster, at least for now... > > > > I also shared some aspects of my experience making decisions this way: > > > > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/76407#30 > > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/76407#41 > > Thanks for those! > > I will admit I dropped off the discussion largely because my enthusiasm > was sapped a bit, in addition to being technically hard to find a way to > follow a threaded discussion on the bug report (once the mailing lists > were (inconsistantly) dropped from the discussion)). > > > live well, > vagrant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
