[MetaCRS] RFC 1: MetaCRS PSC

[Hugues Wisniewski]

Frank,

That all makes sense :)
Thanks for the input

Hugues

-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Warmerdam (External)
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 1:44 PM
To: Hugues Wisniewski
Cc: metacrs at lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [MetaCRS] RFC 1: MetaCRS PSC

Hugues Wisniewski wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> It all looks good to me. I don't know how this is usually handled in other
> projects, I'm just wondering if 2 business days is enough in case one or
> more members of the committee are unavailable to review the proposal because
> of vacation, travel or whatever other reason

Hugues,

There are differing opinions on this.  The problem with long vote periods
is that getting anything done can seem glacial.  The problem with short
voting periods is that someone might not have time for review.

The usual practice is to first float a complex idea for feedback (as I
am now with RFC 1), and then call for a vote after preliminary feedback
has been incorporated.  This cuts down on the revise-revote cycle.  So,
in practice a complex technical RFC will usually take quite a bit more than
2 days to get approved.  Also, the chair has the right to extend a vote
if they feel adequate review has not occurred.

I like the 2 day voting period, and it has worked well for GDAL and MapServer
(IMHO).  In fact, it often seems awfully long.  I hate calling for a vote to
approve a release candidate on a Friday and having to wait till Tuesday for
the vote to finish, for instance.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org