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

[Christopher Schmidt]

On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 12:46:55AM -0500, Erik Uzureau wrote:
> On 10/9/07, Paul Spencer <pspencer at dmsolutions.ca> wrote:
> > 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.

I think it's important to have a public record of who voted what way on
a particular question. I don't feel a strong need to have an RFC first
-- the mailing lists are a fine publicly accessible historical resource
-- but a short summary and a list of the vote results in the wiki seems
a great idea.

Our rules for 'no controversial changes without consulting the PSC' not
requiring many votes simply means that we haven't had many controversial
changes, as far as I'm concerned. It becomes more of a question for
things like 'Translation' -- large, sweeping changes that you want
everyone to agree with ahead of time. In general, I try to break these
things up into seperate tasks -- so even though I wrote
http://trac.openlayers.org/wiki/RFC/ParsingAndDisplayingRemoteData as an
"RFC", I realized that there were parts of it that were simply obvious
code-deduplication, and doing that is unlikely to make anyone upset (so
long as the end result is the same on both ends), so I just went ahead
and wrote the patches.

So, not having lots of votes is cool, but having public records for the
votes we do have is also cool.

Regards,
-- 
Christopher Schmidt
MetaCarta