[CHAOSS] How decisions are made (was: Opening discussion on using Discourse Forum for CHAOSS)

Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona jgb at bitergia.com
Tue Nov 20 22:10:23 UTC 2018


Yes. The basic assumption is that everyone is in the mailing list
(maybe with some delay), so is consensus is perceived in the call, that
would be a proposal to be shared in the mailing list, where if somebody
disagrees, can express it, and therefore we all learn that consensus
was not complete.

So, topics agreed in calls would be sent to the mailing list as
proposals on which people participating in the call think there is
already consensus, but knowing they may be wrong.

Do you all agree? If so, I can write some text for our repository.

Saludos,

	Jesus.

On Tue, 2018-11-20 at 15:30 -0600, Georg Link wrote:
> Yes, the proposal is to document what the decision making process is
> (who gets to decide, where is the decision made, where are decisions
> documented/archived).
> 
> Yes, the mailing list (until we switch to Discourse ;p ) is the final
> place for 'closure' = decision finalizing and archiving.
> 
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 1:03 PM Matt Germonprez <germonprez at gmail.com
> > wrote:
> > Hi Georg and all, 
> > 
> > Thanks for discussing this at today's weekly hangout... sorry I
> > couldn't make it. From my reading of your summary, it sounds like
> > things largely stay as they are in the CHAOSS project but relying
> > on the mail list for 'closure' more so than the weekly meetings. Is
> > this right? 
> > 
> > I do think that there are good points that has been raised in all
> > of this -- to not overly complicate a process such that it gets in
> > the way of doing good CHAOSS work and maintaining transparency in
> > any decision-making process. 
> > 
> > Matt
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 12:39 PM Emma Irwin <eirwin at mozilla.com>
> > wrote:
> > > I am not sure I understand your point.  You feel like CHAOSS is
> > > like Debian?
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 10:37 AM dmg <dmg at uvic.ca> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 10:31 AM Emma Irwin <eirwin at mozilla.com
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Documentation of who makes decisions, their role(s), and the
> > > > process they follow is half the battle to gaining trust, and
> > > > increased participation in decision-making.   Most of the time
> > > > people are not interested in challenging, but they do want to
> > > > be consulted.  This is a great talk from Rust on that topic.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Suggest never saying 'that's how most open source projects'
> > > > do things, when referencing governance discussions.
> > > > 
> > > > I suggest you go count the number of packages in debian, count
> > > > the
> > > > number of projects that they belong to and then find how many
> > > > of them
> > > > have a decision process. I suggest you do random sampling,
> > > > since the
> > > > number is large (reach a certain level of confidence, say 90%
> > > > +/-10%
> > > > error).
> > > > 
> > > > you will find most open source (at least in debian) is built by
> > > > 1 or 2
> > > > developers who make all the decisions without a process in
> > > > place.
> > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 10:16 AM dmg <dmg at turingmachine.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > I don't think this has always being the case, but I would
> > > > say
> > > > >> > that
> > > > >> > usually people argue in favor or against, and propose
> > > > different
> > > > >> > decisions, in the mailing list, and then during the calls,
> > > > >> > consensus
> > > > >> > areas are explored until a decision is perceived to have
> > > > >> > consensus. But
> > > > >> > other people who has participated in these processes may
> > > > say too
> > > > >> > if
> > > > >> > this matches their experience.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> hi Jesus
> > > > >>
> > > > >> with all due respect, I think most decisions are not
> > > > >> reached. Simply, the people who are in charge of them
> > > > >> enact them according to the input of others.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> In other words: the doers control what gets done and how,
> > > > with the
> > > > >> possibility that they take into
> > > > >> consideration the input of others.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> there have been some decisions (few) that require a vote of
> > > > the
> > > > >> board. But in general,
> > > > >> we have silent consent.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think this is perfectly fine. It is just the way that most
> > > > open
> > > > >> source projects work.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> perhaps at some point, the board might get the ability to
> > > > veto
> > > > >> actions by CHAOSS members via a majority
> > > > >> vote.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Up to now, my feeling is this worked well. But maybe it is
> > > > not
> > > > >> > scaling
> > > > >> > up as we have more people involved in general, people
> > > > active in
> > > > >> > working
> > > > >> > groups, the set of people attending all calls, and
> > > > participating
> > > > >> > in all
> > > > >> > mailing lists, is getting shorter and shorter (as a
> > > > fraction of
> > > > >> > the
> > > > >> > total people involved in CHAOSS as a whole).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think we all have our opinions on what needs/should be
> > > > done. But
> > > > >> unless we are willing to do it,
> > > > >> we should not get on the way of those doing it.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There are situations where actions of CHAOSS members on
> > > > behalf of
> > > > >> CHAOSS might veer outside the goals of the project (which is
> > > > >> subjective---I grant, personally
> > > > >> I have see at least one instance of this happening). This
> > > > might
> > > > >> require a process to bring a vote to the validity of those
> > > > >> actions.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > * First, comment on your feelings about the decision
> > > > making
> > > > >> > process, in
> > > > >> > this specific case and in general. If many of us think
> > > > that we
> > > > >> > need to
> > > > >> > decide more formally on a process, we can work on having
> > > > one. If
> > > > >> > not,
> > > > >> > we can stick to the current way.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > * Second, if somebody feels that in this specific case we
> > > > don't
> > > > >> > have a
> > > > >> > consensus, we can either talk it more broadly, or raising
> > > > it to
> > > > >> > the
> > > > >> > CHAOSS Board. We have a meeting in a week, so this would
> > > > be
> > > > >> > timely.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > What do you think?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> see above. I have addressed both points.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >       Jesus.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > --
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> Daniel M. German                  "Language alone protects
> > > > us from
> > > > >> the scariness
> > > > >>                                    of things with no names.
> > > > >>    Toni Morrison ->                Language alone is
> > > > meditation. "
> > > > >> http://turingmachine.org/
> > > > >> http://silvernegative.com/
> > > > >> dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca
> > > > >> replace (at) with @ and (dot) with .
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Emma Irwin (she/her)
> > > > > Community Development
> > > > > Open Innovation Team
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > --dmg
> > > > 
> > > > ---
> > > > Daniel M. German
> > > > http://turingmachine.org
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Emma Irwin (she/her)
> > > Community Development
> > > Open Innovation Team
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CHAOSS mailing list
> > > CHAOSS at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chaoss
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Mutual of Omaha Associate Professor
> > Information Systems 
> > College of Information Science & Technology 
> > University of Nebraska Omaha
> > he / him / his
> > https://goo.gl/E87KdK
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CHAOSS mailing list
> CHAOSS at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chaoss
-- 
Bitergia: http://bitergia.com
/me at Twitter: https://twitter.com/jgbarah




More information about the CHAOSS mailing list