[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

tech-ctte decision/feedback speed (was: Re: Bug#797533: New CTTE members)

(bug dropped, subject changed)

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 01:32:16PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "josh" == josh  <josh@joshtriplett.org> writes:
>     josh> That's not a bad plan, actually.  The three standard options
>     josh> could be, in effect, "preliminary injunction against the
>     josh> maintainer to avoid immediate harm, but we still need to talk
>     josh> about this more", "dismissed as completely inappropriate to
>     josh> have taken to the TC at all", or "we need further discussion
>     josh> before we can even offer an opinion".
> Sure, and I'd also argue that someone on the TC should believe that an
> option other than FD should win before holding a vote.
> We don't need more process for process's sake.

In this case the process wouldn't be for process's sake, though. One of
the failures with #776708 was that it was urgent and there was simply no
feedback from the ctte that there was disagreement blocking a quick

> But having something like this in place and an understanding on the TC
> that if k TC members (probably k = 1) feel this is reasonable calling
> for such a vote is a fine thing to do.

I think if the submitter thinks the issues is urgent ("freeze deadline in
24 hours! help!") that should be enough; even if none of the TC think an
immediate decision is actually reasonable, having an actual vote that
documents that would still be helpful.

I tend to think "automatic" processes are better than ones that actually
require humans to think about them. In this case, if ctte members have
to come up with an answer to "is immediately overriding the maintainer
reasonable?", then it seems easier to do that in response to a thoughtless
automatic vote, and also more transparent to do it by voting than simply
not doing anything as a result of deciding one way.

Heck, maybe make the process be: urgent issues get voted on a day after
they're filed, and every issue gets a vote proposed one day after the
monthly meeting. FD is always a valid option, but members voting for FD
should make it clear what they think actually needs further discussion.

(In #766708's case, I would probably have personally voted "decline to
overrule maintainer" above FD for #766708 immediately, given the freeze
deadline likely made FD an effective rejection anyway)


Reply to: