[Dbix-class] Fwd: Re: GOVERNANCE: An actually concrete proposal w/bootstrap governance system

[Matt S Trout]

My timing sucks:

Day changed to 21 Oct 2016
07:17 -!- abraxxa [~abraxxa at tsa-tc-flod-1.t-systems.at] has joined #dbic-cabal
15:57 -!- abraxxa [~abraxxa at tsa-tc-flod-1.t-systems.at] has quit [Quit: 
          Leaving.]
15:57 < mst> abraxxa: to be completely honest, I excluded you from my proposal 
             purely on the basis that I didn't want to see a four-page ribarant 
             about your "urge for shiny new things" :)
15:57 < mst> oh for FUCK's sake, he left literally while I was typing that

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 04:44:16PM +0200, Hartmaier Alexander wrote:
> On 2016-10-19 05:58, Chris Prather wrote:
> I suck at email and this got bounced initially.
> 
> -Chris
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Chris Prather <perigrin at prather.org<mailto:perigrin at prather.org>>
> Date: Oct 18, 2016 at 11:56 PM
> To: DBIx::Class user and developer list <dbix-class at lists.scsys.co.uk<mailto:dbix-class at lists.scsys.co.uk>>
> Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] GOVERNANCE: An actually concrete proposal w/bootstrap governance system
> 
> So I'm only a interested user of DBIC. I took enough DBA classes in college to make me painfully aware that I don't want to understand how DBIC does what it does. I'm just very happy it does it.
> 
> I am however deeply vested in how the Perl community self-regulates, and as such I've read probably more of this thread (and the related threads) than is healthy for someone who really should be busy trying to find paying work. That said I think this Governance Policy has merit, there are only three changes I would recommend two need to be made nearly immutable at the outset to be effective, one has already been proposed and can be adopted later.
> 
> ----
> 
> 1) The list of people with PAUSE COMAINT permissions and the list of of Voting Members should always be identical. Best would be if FIRSTCOME were held in trust by some DBIC account similar to how XML permissions are held (https://metacpan.org/author/DAHUT), and everyone else on the VM list were strictly co-maint. This might be overly complicated for what is mostly symbolic reasons but it would go a long way to demonstrating the new Governance.
> 
> If someone resigns from the VM then they are removed from COMAINT.
> 
> 2) Voting Members and the LAV (List aggregate Vote) have unilateral veto power for any proposal. Meaning if any Voting Member or the LAV make an explicit -1 to a proposal. The Proposal as it stands *in that thread* is dead. It will need to be re-proposed in such a way that the vetoing member either assents or abstains. This protects minority voices. My preference would be to require unanimity of consent but that would IN MY OPINION simply open the process up to be gamed during it's infancy.
> 
> Finally this has already been proposed but I would add my experience with the Moose community.
> 
> 3) A full PROPOSAL is required to merge a topic branch into the mainline release branch.
> 
> ----
> 
> This is far more than I was planning on commenting but having read as much of all of the relvant threads as possible I don't think that the policy *as proposed* is as conservative as it should be to properly reflect the concerns of all members of the community who've been involved in the conversation to date.
> 
> Thanks for your time in reading my ramblings.
> 
> -Chris
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd hoped that such regulations (like YAPC::NAs code-of-conduct) aren't necessary but it seems they are... ;(
> 
> 1) and 2) sounds reasonable to me, +1.
> 
> Controlling changes to the (git) repo is imho more important than when a release is made, so I'm +1 for 3).
> Master, or the per supported major version branch if we have more than one some time in the future, should always be in a releasable state which has the advantage that each co-maintainer can cut a release regardless if (s)he was involved in the commits leading up to  the current one.
> DBIC once followed the "release early, release often" policy which encouraged people to report bugs and contribute features. Not seeing a release in month which fixes a minor annoyance or bug turned me off very much.
> 
> If the proposed core team and community or whoever will decide what will happen wants, I'd be glad and honored to keep my co-maintainer status for DBIC. I didn't step up as 'voice of stability' as I do know that my urge for shiny new things would hinder me to fulfill that expectation.
> I did listen and have hopefully learned enough from mst and ribasushi in the last ten years to find a middle course between adding features to core and not breaking the API.
> 
> Thanks for all your efforts to make DBIC great again!
> 
> 
> *"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*
> T-Systems Austria GesmbH Rennweg 97-99, 1030 Wien
> Handelsgericht Wien, FN 79340b
> *"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*
> Notice: This e-mail contains information that is confidential and may be privileged.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and then
> delete this e-mail immediately.
> *"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*

> _______________________________________________
> List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
> IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
> SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
> Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk


-- 
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.