[Interop-dev] Great outcome! Let's decide on a name
Sat Apr 7 13:38:43 CEST 2012
>> but to write this email at this stage of the project is quite a
One more reason is that for me is quite surprise to have voting. I am
not used to voting. Mostly I am used to consensus decision making. You
have to convince others that your proposal is better. If you cannot, you
have three options:
- show it (for example, in the code, show it that it really works)
- accept some other proposal
- merge/create a new proposal
Yes, it is slower. But it is better. Are we really in a hurry? With a
name? No, we are not.
(And for those who would say that consensus decision making does not
work, it does, because you have two forces working into its favor:
possibility of fork (which nobody wants, so you are willing to
compromise) and option that if nobody agrees with you you can always do
it/show it yourself (or with others who agrees with you), it is not
always really necessary to have a complete consensus, because often
multiple proposals can live both be tried (and here it is important that
you are willing to go with your proposal to the stage to be possible to
be tried, not just propose it).)
Direct/simple voting is for me tyranny of majority. For me this is a
surprise. But OK. If we want to do voting, then let us decide who can
vote. Is this not a normal question to ask?
> Why exactly? I think this is the most important thing (more than name,
> this can always be changed later on) to decide in advance. Do we feel
> the same about this, do we not? Can we build some common agreement?
> There are different development practices we are maybe used to, so it is
> good to understand how we feel about it. I would like to ask you how do
> you feel about it.
>> I guess only people who are committed to this project are engaging at
>> the moment.
> Committed in what way, this is the question I am asking. :-)
> Interop-dev mailing list
More information about the Interop-dev