Hi, Am Samstag, den 25.05.2013, 14:54 +0100 schrieb Ian Lynagh:
A few people have used the word "vote", but we don't vote on library proposals. If we wanted to change that then we would first need to answer the question of who was elligible to vote.
more structure in the decision making would be helpful. Also, the +1/-1 mailing list voting is everything but efficient, and I have pity for those who manually track and count the votes. I assume that everyone involved here has a hackage account, or would not mind getting one. How about a small web app on hackage.org that allows everyone (with an account) to start a poll, or to extend a poll with additional options, and to vote on the poll. Then the tallying would be much easier (i.e. automatic). Also, just to put a bit more meriocracy into the process, the tally could have several columns: One just the number of votes for each option, then one with the votes weighted by number of packages uploaded by the voter on hackage, and then one with the votes weighted by number of packages × reverse dependencies. I’d deliberately put in several metics at once to stress that this is _not_ a binding vote with clear majority requirements, but it would allow the final evaluation to have a much clearer picture of the level of consensus. Also we do not put too much emphasis on these numbers, to avoid people uploading packages just for the stats.¹ Greetings, Joachim ¹ like I once did a mostly trivial upload during a Hackathon just to get into the raffle for a signed copy of RWH, which actually worked :-) -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata