Re: [PATCH] Documentation: propose community voting process

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> writes:

> Not all discussions can be settled by community consensus. For truly
> contentious decisions we need a way to democratically make a decision
> that represents the majority will of the project. This doc outlines the
> methodology we use in the rare case where we need to vote to make a
> decision.
>
> Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>
> ---
> I expect the approval of the voting process itself to be fairly non-contentious
> (or else I haven't managed to write a fair process!) so for approving the
> voting process, I suggest we use a similar approach to the one we did with the
> Code of Conduct back in 2019[2][3]: discussing the process itself, ultimately
> coming to general consensus, and collecting a list of Acked-by: to put onto the
> commit outlining the voting process.

Sounds sensible.  One request to change the wording of the title is
to use a verb stronger than "propose".  The act of sending this
patch alone is a proposal, but once committed and merged, that is
not "propose a process", but "define the process used in this
community".

> And by the way, I do think that we should
> check in the voting process; it seems likely to me that we will want to revise
> the AI policy again given the pace of development, and it may be useful for
> other discussions that we've had trouble resolving in the past.
>
> BTW, there are some parts of this proposal that I still don't have a good
> answer for, so look for my self-review immediately to follow, highlighting open
> questions.

Thanks for starting the process.