RE: oVirt comminuty voting
-----Original Message-----
From: project-planning-bounces(a)ovirt.org
[mailto:project-planning-bounces@ovirt.org] On Behalf Of Anthony
Liguori
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 18:11 PM
To: cctrieloff(a)redhat.com
Cc: project-planning(a)ovirt.org
Subject: Re: oVirt comminuty voting
On 09/13/2011 09:02 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
> On 09/13/2011 09:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> A project lead implies that somehow his/her vote is more important
>> than anyone else's, which is not how the ASF works.
>>
>> The idea is to build a community that strives for consensus so that
>> the need for tie-breaking votes isn't required. If half the community
>> thinks A and the other B, then there is for sure no consensus.
>
>
> I know many of the Linux projects use the concept of a group elected
tie
> break role. This is different to ASF. Jim brings up a good point
and
the
> question is do we want it, or not?
As long as we're preserving autonomy for established projects, I think
any model as long as it's consistent for smaller projects would work.
Do we count ovirt engine as an established project :) ?
I think our current model is of a tie breaking vote in case of
disagreement...