-----Original Message----- From: project-planning-bounces@ovirt.org [mailto:project-planning-bounces@ovirt.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Liguori Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 18:11 PM To: cctrieloff@redhat.com Cc: project-planning@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...