mirror of
https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd.git
synced 2024-09-27 06:25:44 +00:00
Governance: Use lazy consensus when needed to make decision
In lack of supermajority, we sometimes required to hold on to important decisions for long time. In order to speed up, after giving enough time for supermajority, use lazy consensus.
This commit is contained in:
parent
cc5d6f7dc3
commit
e02ceee9f3
@ -42,8 +42,9 @@ below.
|
|||||||
Contributors who are interested in becoming a maintainer, if performing these
|
Contributors who are interested in becoming a maintainer, if performing these
|
||||||
responsibilities, should discuss their interest with the existing maintainers. New
|
responsibilities, should discuss their interest with the existing maintainers. New
|
||||||
maintainers must be nominated by an existing maintainer and must be elected by a
|
maintainers must be nominated by an existing maintainer and must be elected by a
|
||||||
supermajority of maintainers. Likewise, maintainers can be removed by a supermajority
|
supermajority of maintainers with a fallback on lazy consensus after three business weeks
|
||||||
of the maintainers and moved to emeritus status.
|
inactive voting period and as long as two maintainers are on board. Maintainers can be
|
||||||
|
removed by a supermajority of the maintainers and moved to emeritus status.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Life priorities, interests, and passions can change. If a maintainer needs to step
|
Life priorities, interests, and passions can change. If a maintainer needs to step
|
||||||
down, inform other maintainers about this intention, and if possible, help find someone
|
down, inform other maintainers about this intention, and if possible, help find someone
|
||||||
@ -57,8 +58,10 @@ file.
|
|||||||
reviewing the code contribution from other contributors. Their LGTM counts towards
|
reviewing the code contribution from other contributors. Their LGTM counts towards
|
||||||
merging a code change into the project. A reviewer is generally on the ladder towards
|
merging a code change into the project. A reviewer is generally on the ladder towards
|
||||||
maintainership. New reviewers must be nominated by an existing maintainer and must be
|
maintainership. New reviewers must be nominated by an existing maintainer and must be
|
||||||
elected by a supermajority of maintainers. Likewise, reviewers can be removed by a
|
elected by a supermajority of maintainers with a fallback on lazy consensus after three
|
||||||
supermajority of the maintainers or can resign by notifying the maintainers.
|
business weeks inactive voting period and as long as two maintainers are on board.
|
||||||
|
Reviewers can be removed by a supermajority of the maintainers or can resign by notifying
|
||||||
|
the maintainers.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Decision making process
|
## Decision making process
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -73,7 +76,8 @@ worked out between the persons involved. However, any technical dispute that has
|
|||||||
reached an impasse with a subset of the community, any contributor may open a GitHub
|
reached an impasse with a subset of the community, any contributor may open a GitHub
|
||||||
issue or PR or send an email to `etcd-maintainers@googlegroups.com`. If the
|
issue or PR or send an email to `etcd-maintainers@googlegroups.com`. If the
|
||||||
maintainers themselves cannot decide an issue, the issue will be resolved by a
|
maintainers themselves cannot decide an issue, the issue will be resolved by a
|
||||||
supermajority of the maintainers.
|
supermajority of the maintainers with a fallback on lazy consensus after three business
|
||||||
|
weeks inactive voting period and as long as two maintainers are on board.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Changes in Governance
|
## Changes in Governance
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user