[Dbix-class] Please don't try to start voting yet

[Matt S Trout]

On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 02:30:22PM -0700, Darin McBride wrote:
> (In fact, if I remember, I'd propose the same rule of thumb for voting here in 
> general - rather than making it a hard-and-fast 72hr wait, I'd suggest in 
> general, using an async communication method such as email, that the rule 
> should be more along the lines of "whenever the conversation has died down, 
> run its course, or stand at an impasse, or 72 hours, whichever is longer, the 
> proposer, or any VM, may call for a vote, itself seconded by any other person 
> among the proposer and VMs."  This is a bit looser than your proposal, but 
> also less formal, and I don't know about you guys, but most programmers I know 
> aren't that formal.)

I intentionally started off with a relatively formal version, with the
expectation that once we got a rhythm going we'd look at what could safely
be relaxed later on.

Also, I'm faintly concerned that "run its course" can make a vote take
indefinitely long, and what I'd -rather- do is establish a norm that we
let the discussion in the PROPOSAL thread run its course before starting
the VOTE thread, then the voting part is fixed (and people can -1 for "you
didn't let the conversation finish"). Also that way you don't run into
issues where people have different interpretations of "run its course" and
we end up in a meta-argument about that.

-- 
Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a clue

http://shadowcat.co.uk/blog/matt-s-trout/   http://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/

Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our CPAN
commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team.