[Fwd: Re: [GRASS5] Proposal: RFC 1: Project Steering Committee Guidelines]

[Brad Douglas]

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 10:56 -0400, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> Brad Douglas wrote:
> > Also, I object to the use of +/-0.  How is that supposed to be
> > quantified?  What are the implications when it comes to tie breaking?
> 
> Brad,
> 
> +0 indicates mild support but not to the degree of being willing to help
> implement the feature or take any responsibility.
> 
> -0 indicates mild disagreement, but not sufficient to try and stop (veto)
> the proposal.  A -0 also does not require significant justification.  It
> can be just a statement if mild unease with the idea.
> 
> Neither has any effect on tie breaking.  I would stress that the "lazy
> consensus" model of Apache, MapServer and GDAL is not about "close votes"
> it is about reaching consensus with veto overrides only being a last
> resort.

I realize it's intended purpose, but if it has no real function beyond
"metadata" I'm against it.  It'll only muddle issues of contention.


-- 
Brad Douglas <rez touchofmadness com>                      KB8UYR
Address: 37.493,-121.924 / WGS84    National Map Corps #TNMC-3785