10 Oct
2011
10 Oct
'11
11:20 p.m.
On Oct 10, 2011, at 11:08 PM, Alex Busenius wrote:
Hi Vincent,
On 10.10.2011 21:47, Vincent Massol wrote:
Well, then the topic of this vote is wrong.
The question whether a vote is "fake" IMO depends on what counts in the
end. If we decide and then pretend as if we would vote, then yes, it is
fake, we should better just write an announcement.
There is a difference whether we privately decide about something vs. we
discuss something among us to have a feeling whether it is worth trying
to vote and then publicly vote. Those 2 cases might look the same from
the viewpoint of a committer, but they are definitely not the same for
the others, and that is what counts.
The difference is that in a public vote:
1. The final decision is not fallen yet
2. Some committers can change their mind after discussions with the
community
3. It actually *involves* the community, although they have no binding
veto etc.
Besides, regarding the fact that 90% of committers are XWiki SAS
employees, we should try not to make a wrong impression that the company
leaders influence the decisions behind the scenes.
Actually the latest stats on this is 64% of *active* XWiki Core committers are from XWiki
SAS.
See http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Drafts/Committers
If Andreas is voted in, that'll make it 61% :)
I like this trend, it's great.
Thanks
-Vincent
Hi Alex,
On Oct 10, 2011, at 8:55 PM, Alex Busenius wrote:
Well,
thats is enough IMO :)
Hi,
I'm -1 for the idea of moving votes about some selected topics to a
secret mailing list.
The proposal/vote is only about voting about committers on a private list. ATM I
don't see any other vote topics that would justify being done privately. The most important point of public votes is to
provide transparency to
the community, which not only consists of informing the community of
secretly made decisions, but also explaining why those decisions were
made and leaving a possibility for everyone to discuss and interact with
the committers. Remember, that by our rules, anyone is allowed to vote,
it's just that only the committers have a binding vote.
Sure, we're not changing this.
I agree
that choosing and excluding new committers are sensitive topics,
so it makes sense to discuss such things in private first
What's the point of a "fake" vote if f it's been discussed before? If
we discuss it privately and one of us is against it, we're not going to propose it so
if we propose a vote publicly it means we all agree so what's the point of sending a
vote?
I don't
see any interest in saying something like: "this person has been voted in as a
committer, please provide your feedback within 48 hours if you think it's a bad
idea!"
Or: "committers have agreed not to vote this person as a committer, please provide
arguments if you think committers should revise their judgements!"
I don't think we should post anything about candidates that didn't event
make it to a vote (please note the difference to "we have agreed not to
vote someone as committer"), it destroys the point of discussing it
privately beforehand to not hurt someone's feelings.
Thanks,
Alex
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>> , but the
>> actual vote should be public, with committers standing behind their
>> votes and with enough time for others (i.e. for not-committers) to speak
>> up and influence the vote.
>>
>> So I'm +0 for a private mailing list for sensitive topics (+0 because I
>> don't see how contacting 15 people that are all in the same skype chat
>> once a year is hard), but we should not vote there.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
>>
>>
>> On 10.10.2011 15:05, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>> Hi devs,
>>>
>>> There are a few topics that are not supposed to be public or that would be
better be not public.
>>>
>>> One such topic is when we want to VOTE someone as a committer. It's very
uncomfortable to do this in the open for the following reasons:
>>> * committers are tempted to VOTE +1 since voting negatively is seen publicly,
including by the person being voted on
>>> * it's very undelicate to have this in the open especially if the person
is voted down since that'll affect that person's morale and future participation
in the project
>>>
>>> So I'd like to propose creating a committers(a)xwiki.org list with the
following characteristics:
>>> * private, visible only to committers
>>>
>>> I also propose it to use it for voting committers.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Vincent