[MPlayer-dev-eng] [POLICY] clarify conditions for functionality removal

[Diego Biurrun]

On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 08:08:55PM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >
> >It *is* current practice.  No rules are set in stone.  Things are
> >discussed on dev-eng until a consensus is reached.
> 
> I'd just like to note that that is not what the current form says, nor
> is it what the old form said about "changing behaviour". No mention is
> made of "consensus"; all it says is that discussion must take place, not
> that the discussion must reach any particular conclusion first.

It also does not say how long the discussion has to be, so could you
interpret this to mean that a single warning mail is enough?  All the
rules imply some common sense.  Words always have a context that has
to be taken into consideration.  The context here is current practice.

> Saying "discussing it on the mplayer-dev-eng mailing list and
> receiving some form of consensus approval" would avoid the problem.

That's what I take "discuss" to mean in this context.  I don't think
this needs further clarification.  If people disagree, a constructive
road to take would be to propose clarifications.

> >And don't simply revert a commit that is obviously under
> >controversial dispute without even waiting _a few hours_ for me to
> >answer your last email.  This is beyond rude.
> 
> Agreed, it is. It is also precisely the sort of behaviour which would be
> 'allowed', with respect to feature removal, under the current phrasing
> of the rule under discussion. After all, discussion of his proposed
> change (reverting your change) has taken place...

You'll be very aware of the difference between "has taken place" and "is
taking place".  Maybe I assumed the discussion to be over prematurely,
but at least I waited two full days and the majority of voices in the
thread was in favor or neutral...

Diego