Bug#636783: TC constitutional issues
* Ian Jackson (ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk) [140228 12:15]:
> Andreas Barth writes ("Bug#636783: TC constitutional issues"):
> > * Ian Jackson (ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk) [140227 19:27]:
> > > * 2:1 supermajority for TC overrides should be abolished (seems
> > > we are probably agreed on this - speak now if not)
> >
> > I prefer if any decision to override the TC is statistically safe,
> > i.e. not just one vote above 50%. For the init system decision I
> > expected this to be the case anyways (so I'm happy with the GR rider),
> > but for "normal overrides" I would prefer something like 55% or "at
> > least 20 votes more" or so. (I don't have any detailed opinion on what
> > is adequate, but I prefer it to be a bit more than 1:1).
>
> Do you think it likely that the project might have a series of GRs
> with contradictory outcomes ?
For the init system or overall?
For any decision we should make sure that we have a statistically
working vote. For normal cases however we don't have any default
option we should reasonably fall-back to, so I don't think we should
change there anything. For overridings however we could fall-back to
the original decision.
> I think that if feeling is very close the right answer is to have it
> decided by bare majority in a GR. If you did as you suggest, and the
> override GR failed 200 in favour vs 199 against, the holding of a
> another GR would be nearly inevitable.
I'm not convinced. Actually it means that the developers at large are
don't consider overriding necessary enough. I'm also not convinced the
next GR would have more in favour, or more against.
Andi
Reply to: