[Fwd: Re: [GRASS5] Proposal: RFC 1: Project Steering Committee
rez at touchofmadness.com
Fri Apr 28 18:50:42 EDT 2006
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?
> +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
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
More information about the grass-dev