[python-committers] Proposal on how to vote (was: An alternative governance model)
lukasz at langa.pl
Wed Jul 18 18:31:40 EDT 2018
The PSF uses a good voting system where votes are secret. I see no reason not to reuse this infra.
> On Jul 18, 2018, at 5:26 PM, Antoine Pitrou <antoine at python.org> wrote:
> By the way, should the vote be public or secret?
> For such an important (and sensitive) matter, perhaps it would be wise
> for it to be secret.
>> Le 19/07/2018 à 00:18, Łukasz Langa a écrit :
>>> On Jul 18, 2018, at 4:56 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>>> While I am totally fine with a super-majority of votes for something to be accepted, I don't think the minimum participation requirement will work. If people simply choose not to vote then they choose not to (we have no way to really compel people to vote).
>> It could be easily added to the list of things expected from a core contributor. It's not like this is a laborious chore, neither is it happening often. There are countries where voting is mandatory.
>> Taking a step back, there are two reasons I stress the importance of (almost) everybody voicing their support:
>> - this makes the decision authoritative ("the committers have spoken");
>> - this ensures that we haven't omitted somebody due to poor timing ("I was on a sabbatical and couldn't vote").
>> If you feel like this is unrealistic because most of our committers aren't currently active, I hear you. But what I like even less is claiming that "we, the core team" made a decision when, say, just 35% of us voted. In such case it would be easier for those of us who disagree to claim the decision doesn't really represent the views of the greater core team.
>> - Ł
>> python-committers mailing list
>> python-committers at python.org
>> Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
More information about the python-committers