atom feed107 messages in org.apache.communityRe: request: terms/definitions for th...
FromSent OnAttachments
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 4, 2002 11:08 am 
Vadim GritsenkoNov 4, 2002 12:47 pm 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 4, 2002 1:10 pm 
John KeyesNov 4, 2002 3:25 pm 
Sam RubyNov 4, 2002 4:33 pm 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 5, 2002 5:37 pm 
Peter DonaldNov 5, 2002 6:25 pm 
Costin ManolacheNov 5, 2002 7:33 pm 
Aaron BannertNov 5, 2002 9:27 pm 
Aaron BannertNov 5, 2002 9:30 pm 
Ted HustedNov 6, 2002 5:15 am 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 6, 2002 6:55 pm 
Daniel RallNov 6, 2002 10:12 pm 
Sam RubyNov 7, 2002 3:43 am 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 7, 2002 4:11 am 
Ted HustedNov 7, 2002 4:31 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 7, 2002 5:33 am 
Sam RubyNov 7, 2002 8:01 am 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 7, 2002 9:27 am 
Costin ManolacheNov 7, 2002 12:39 pm 
Rich BowenNov 8, 2002 4:36 am 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 8, 2002 9:06 am 
Sam RubyNov 8, 2002 1:50 pm 
Costin ManolacheNov 8, 2002 2:05 pm 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 8, 2002 2:46 pm 
Costin ManolacheNov 8, 2002 3:11 pm 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 8, 2002 3:48 pm 
Craig R. McClanahanNov 8, 2002 4:02 pm 
Andrew C. OliverNov 8, 2002 4:57 pm 
Andrew C. OliverNov 8, 2002 5:03 pm 
Martin van den BemtNov 8, 2002 5:14 pm 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 8, 2002 5:48 pm 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 8, 2002 5:51 pm 
James TaylorNov 8, 2002 5:56 pm 
Craig R. McClanahanNov 8, 2002 5:58 pm 
Craig R. McClanahanNov 8, 2002 6:05 pm 
Sam RubyNov 8, 2002 6:17 pm 
70 later messages
Subject:Re: request: terms/definitions for the glossary
From:Rodent of Unusual Size (Ken.@Golux.Com)
Date:Nov 6, 2002 6:55:05 pm
List:org.apache.community

Costin Manolache wrote:

I think more details on 'veto' validity are needed - we had a lot of problems in this issue. Like the second opinion.

working on that. thanks.

It should also include some mention on release and codebase decisions ( i.e. majority vote for releases, and clarification on the 'revolution' rules ).

how the voting rules are applied is a per-community thing, supposedly spelt out in the group's guidelines. the basic things that apply across all projects are the concept of majority rule for non-code issues, the significance and application of vetos, and (((plus_1 >= 3) || lazy_consensus) && (! veto)) for code decisions and other things decided by the community to require that form of voting.

if the 'revolution rules' are those described by the proposal ted wrote (?) which i cited earlier, they also i think are a per-community thing. a fair approach to providing support for development of alternatives when a veto has been expressed, but more formalised in the project guidelines at jakarta than anywhere else afaik. elsewhere the 'revolutionary' development happens offline. the jakarta model may not work in other communities; i could see some regarding its application as noisy and a distraction from the 'main work' of the project, but it's an interesting concept that at least should be documented, particularly for the incubator. so i'll write my take on it and ask you (and others) to check it.