[MPlayer-cvslog] r22386 - trunk/DOCS/tech/new_policy.txt

[Ivan Kalvachev]

2007/3/1, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at>:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 12:40:47PM +0200, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:
> [...]
> > >+Vs. Starting a vote
> > >+Any single developer can start a vote, to do so she has to send a mail to
> > >the
> >
> > she? Only women can start a vote?
>
> no, its common practice to use she instead of he in documents where the
> gender of the person isnt known

Never heard of it. However I've seen use of "they" for single form
when the gender is unspecified. Indeed, it sounds weird...

> [...]
> > >+that is yes >= no && yes>0 cast a veto against it
> > >+Vcc. the votes shall be counted by using the Condorcet/Clone Proof SSD
> >
> > Is it this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method ?
>
> its the one used by debian, refering to a changeable thing like wiki
> would be a bad idea for policy

You'd have to provide detailed explanation of the method (URL by your
choice) or/and even simple program to calculate the results.

e.g. I'm sure we would like to know at least what the integer assigned
to options means. aka smaller number-> preferred option?

> [...]
> >
> > I don't think that your voting system takes meritocracy into account.
>
> well, suggest a fair one which does and we can disscuss it

I'll leave that to Mr  Biurrun, who is the one enforcing it.

> > There is also a lot of unclear things - the definition of  admin (e.g.
> > case where (s)he is root of mphq but not developer)
>
> "every admin is also a developer" thats clear IMHO, there are no admins
> which are not developers that would be inappropriate anyway IMHO
> a person with such great power over developers should be a developer
> herself otherwise the person would IMHO simply not be qualified to make
> decissions over developers

I also used to think so, but I was proven wrong.

"every admin is also a developer" is statement, not definition. You do
not define admin as e.g. "person who have access to the raw
repository, can add/remove accounts in svn and can do svn admin".

You use admin more in the sense of project leader.

I tend to remember that e.g. sourceforge.net system had admins that
had wider control over the project (file releases, repository,
accounts, moderation), but it didn't refer to the sf.net servers
personal as such admins.

> > Also it is not clear what happens when winning option is selected.
>
> elaborate please

No issue here.
I've missed the "The result of vote is binding..."

> > About suspending account. What happens if I commit trojan in code I
> > maintain. I'm not breaking any existing rule.
> > After the new rule is added would my account be suspended on first or
> > on the second offense?
>
> id close your account at the spot if you did that assuming i had the
> power :)

In ffmpeg maybe, but in mplayer you are "one of the many".

> also i dont think we need a rule for that as its clear what to do and
> something like that didnt happen yet, its more important to deal with
> thing which do happen

The issue here is what to do with cases that are not clear violation
of the existing written rules. Do we vote them? (and would the trojan
stay until the vote ends).
Maybe I used too obvious example.

>

There is one more thing I find unclear
So admins can veto all options except doing nothing?

"...in addition to proposed options, there always exists the default
option of doing nothing"
"Any admin can cast a veto against any option except the default up to
10 days days after a vote has been started..."