On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:25:50PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 12:31:51PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > IMHO, it's better to have a vote quickly on a limited set of GR options, > > with the possibility of a second GR if there is sufficient dissatisfaction > > with the first GR outcome, than to have community energy spent endlessly on > > crafting a perfect set of options before we take a vote. > You are saying that whenever there are 6 DDs who don't like the outcome > of the first GR, they should start a second GR that repeals the first GR > and replaces it with something better as soon as the results of the > first GR are posted. Not exactly. I'm saying that whenever there are 6 DDs who don't like the outcome of the first GR, *and believe it could be overturned with a better worded option*, they should start a second GR. > I would rather have one discussion that covers all aspects of the topic, > with all options on one ballot, and then have the topic settled instead > of having an endless succession of GRs around the same topic. So, the option to overturn with a second GR if the first one is considered satisfactory already exists (and would exist under any proposed changes to the system). How often has that option been exercised? I think the existing system already gives you the result you say above that you want. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature