Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Explicit scheduling requirements for online votes #579

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 7, 2020
Merged

Conversation

tlively
Copy link
Member

@tlively tlively commented Jun 9, 2020

Looking in the process docs, I was unable to find specific wording on
our requirement that votes be explicit in the agenda for online
meetings.

The "In-person meeting consensus" section of consensus.md has the
following paragraph:

For in-person meetings, champions are expected to list points for
which they will seek consensus in the meeting agenda, and new
consensus points can be added in-person as the discussion proceeds.

I propose that we add language to the "Online consensus" section
disallowing consensus votes that were not on the agenda 24 hours
before the meeting (our current practice) and I further propose that
we make an exception for general interest votes on pre-proposals. The
goal of this exception is to eliminate artificial process delays for
moving proposals to phase 1, given that the technical bar for that
move is so low.

If we reach consensus on this change here, I will add an agenda item to
vote on this change at a CG meeting.

Looking in the process docs, I was unable to find specific wording on
our requirement that votes be explicit in the agenda for online
meetings.

The "In-person meeting consensus" section of consensus.md has the
following paragraph:

> For in-person meetings, champions are expected to list points for
  which they will seek consensus in the meeting agenda, and new
  consensus points can be added in-person as the discussion proceeds.

I propose that we add language to the "Online consensus" section
disallowing consensus votes that were not on the agenda 24 hours
before the meeting (our current practice) and I further propose that
we make an exception for general interest votes on pre-proposals. The
goal of this exception is to eliminate artificial process delays for
moving proposals to phase 1, given that the technical bar for that
move is so low.
@tlively tlively requested review from binji, rossberg and dtig June 9, 2020 18:55
Copy link
Member

@binji binji left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@tlively
Copy link
Member Author

tlively commented Jul 7, 2020

Merging, as approved by the CG this morning.

@tlively tlively merged commit f57c7dd into master Jul 7, 2020
@tlively tlively deleted the vote-scheduling branch July 7, 2020 18:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants