Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] New x86_64 ISO

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: flux <flux AT sourcemage.org>
  • To: "sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org" <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] New x86_64 ISO
  • Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 07:41:57 -0500

Jaka Kranjc (smgl AT lynxlynx.info) wrote [09.02.24 04:00]:
> On Tuesday 24 of February 2009 02:04:25 flux wrote:
> > Ladislav Hagara (ladislav.hagara AT unob.cz) wrote [09.02.23 19:50]:
> > > Imho we need some quick and easy system for voting for and against some
> > > of these decisions. Some of our decisions are only one man decision. :-(
> >
> > Although I don't know of any "one man decisions" that have happened in
> > the distro recently, I think this is a good idea, and one that I have
> > thought about before. One idea that I had was maybe creating a "vote"
> > section in bugzilla and having votes tracked that way, since it would be
> > easy to open issues for voting on. The problem with that would be making
> > sure people didn't cheat the vote, but I guess the opening of a bug to
> > vote on and the actual tracking of the votes could happen separately
> > anyway.
> We already have an accepted issue voting process, so why complicate the
> matter? The only drawback I see, is that for trivial stuff, general
> developers should have a binding vote too.

Because for trivial issues people only send emails to SM-Discuss, which
isn't really "voting", and it's hard to count emails (apparently). The
issue voting process we have is of course open to be used for trivial
issues, but in my time here I have only ever seen it used for
non-trivial issues. Also, the accepted issue voting process doesn't seem
well-suited to one-off votes, since there is a non-trivial time factor
in getting the vote called in addition to actually running the vote.

However, it was just an idea, and if nobody wants to run with it I don't
have a problem with that, as I'm not especially couched in the idea :) I
do agree that for trivial votes general developers should get binding
votes, but then we have an additional problem: defining what votes are
trivial and what votes are non-trivial.

--
Justin "flux_control" Boffemmyer
Cauldron wizard and general mage
Source Mage GNU/Linux
http://www.sourcemage.org

Attachment: pgpCaoICjE2yY.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page