From owner-cvs-all Sun Dec 27 21:37:04 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA24227 for cvs-all-outgoing; Sun, 27 Dec 1998 21:37:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from implode.root.com (root.com [208.221.12.98]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA24222 for ; Sun, 27 Dec 1998 21:37:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from root@implode.root.com) Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by implode.root.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA05896; Sun, 27 Dec 1998 21:36:24 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199812280536.VAA05896@implode.root.com> To: Greg Lehey cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , Mike Smith , Warner Losh , committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: The recent fracas involving danes, war axes and wounded developers In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 28 Dec 1998 15:54:33 +1030." <19981228155433.X12346@freebie.lemis.com> From: David Greenman Reply-To: dg@root.com Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 21:36:24 -0800 Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk >> I might mention that the policy I proposed to Jordan didn't say >> "unanimous"...it didn't say "majority", either, but that's actually what >> I had in mind. Mike's comment about a quorum is a good one, though, and >> I think this needs to be a majority of core members, not a majority of >> those who vote on the issue. Does this satisfy the concerns? > >You might consider somewhere between unanimous (difficult enough to >achieve that it might cripple the idea) and a simple majority. How >does two thirds sound? I thought about that, but it is difficult to get a quorum large enough to satisfy that requirement. Most of the time only 2/3rds or less of the core team members cast a vote. I won't offer any excuses as to why this is the case. -DG David Greenman Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message