[OpenLayers-Dev] RFC: Resolution to only change License with Unanimous Vote

[Erik Uzureau]

On 10/9/07, Paul Spencer <pspencer at dmsolutions.ca> wrote:
>
> On 9-Oct-07, at 2:10 PM, Christopher Schmidt wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 01:50:56PM -0400, Paul Spencer wrote:
> >> I'm ambivalent on this.  I am not convinced that we need unanimity
> >> (?) on any given issue, but I do think we need everyone to vote so
> >> that we are certain there are no dissenting votes.  I also think
> >> there may be a certain amount of pressure felt by someone that they
> >> have to vote with the rest of the PSC even though they are not
> >> necessarily fully supportive (or even just ambivalent).
> >>
> >> Discuss ... :)
> >
> > I think that license changes are important enough that if you can't
> > get
> > unanimous approval of the PSC, then "You're doing it wrong"[1].
> >
> > That said, I would consider a "+0" to be part of a 'unanimous vote' --
> > indicating no veto -- and since a single -1 vetoes a vote nayway, the
> > practical change to this would only be that all members would have to
> > vote. However, now that I think about it, I think all PSC members
> > really
> > should be voting "+1" to change a license. If you can't get that
> > level of
> > approval, then you shouldn't be changing the license.c
> >
> >
> > [1] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/macjinx/campingmacro.jpg
>
> nice :)
>
> I agree on anything with a + being part of a unanimous vote.  I think
> we are (or at least just I am) abusing the current rules by voting +1
> on everything even if we (I) don't intend to help out.
>
> The PSC needs to maintain a list of things that we have agreed
> (unanimously) require a unanimous vote.

http://trac.openlayers.org/wiki/SteeringCommittee?action=diff&version=8

> Also, I think we should maintain a record of the results of votes.
> The way MapGuide runs their PSC.  An RFC is prepared in the wiki, a
> link is forwarded to dev for discussion, then after a suitable
> waiting period a motion to vote is presented by a PSC member.  After
> the vote, the proponent of the RFC updates the list with the voting
> record.  For issues like this one, this seems like a bit of overkill
> but at least the main text of the RFC and the voting history could be
> plunked into the wiki after a vote?

How do people feel about this? In the past, there have been very few
issues which have required a vote -- the majority of the voting has
just been for releases so far.

If others are interested in this public log of voting, though, I would
be happy to set up some wikistructure to handle it. :-)

Erik

>
> And +1 on making unanimity (all + votes) for this particular issue.
>
> Cheers
>
> Paul
>
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> |Paul Spencer                          pspencer at dmsolutions.ca    |
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> |Chief Technology Officer                                         |
> |DM Solutions Group Inc                http://www.dmsolutions.ca/ |
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at openlayers.org
> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>