[llvm-foundation] Voting

[Renato Golin via llvm-foundation]

I was thinking of writing a document somewhere with the final proposal,
when we get there. I also like Tanya's idea of qualitative feedback instead
of plain voting.

Our core team is less "core", since there are many code owners and many non
owners with a lot of stake in the project.

Everything looks very much like we've been doing anyway. :-)

Cheers,
Renato
On 30 Jun 2016 11:53 p.m., "Chris Lattner via llvm-foundation" <
llvm-foundation at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On Jun 30, 2016, at 1:51 AM, David Chisnall via llvm-foundation <
> llvm-foundation at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > On 29 Jun 2016, at 19:01, Hal Finkel via llvm-foundation <
> llvm-foundation at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> This proposal of course assumes that the LLVM community is to be run
> >>> as a direct democracy. I don't want to distract from your detailed
> >>> proposal, but it seems the desired governance model needs to be
> >>> defined before delving in to the details of how to implement it. Or
> >>> has this discussion taken place somewhere? I'm specifically not
> >>> expressing a view one way or the other. I had assumed the current
> >>> set-up was some combination of BDFL and decisions being taken by
> >>> Foundation board members, but I don't recall this being explicitly
> >>> defined - though it would be good if it was.
> >>
> >> I'd like to second this. I don't think that we should focus on a
> direct-democracy model. Such systems work well only for small groups.
> Having accountable representatives and leaders is better. A smaller group
> of accountable decision makers can invest more time in understanding the
> issues and the alternatives in order to make an informed decision.
> Accountability can come from elections, from the risk of community
> fracturing, etc.
> >
> > I’m not sure if it would help, but the FreeBSD project has spent a few
> decades evolving its governance structures and may provide some useful
> example.
>
> For someone interested in how to settle highly contentious topics which
> are often subjective in nature, might also want to check out the
> swift-evolution process.  Nothing is as contentious, polarizing, and
> subject to personal opinion as making major source breaking changes to a
> programming language that has millions of active users :-)
>
> If you’re interested in the process, it is explained here:
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md
>
> The archive of proposals that we’ve processed (since December) is here:
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution
>
> This is a process inspired by several other open source projects as well.
> I think it would be very reasonable to adapt a similar model to help
> arbitrate contentious issues like the move to github.
>
> -Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-foundation mailing list
> llvm-foundation at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-foundation
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-foundation/attachments/20160701/c07e4a04/attachment.html>