I support the idea of an asynchronous blocker bug process.
Blocker Bugs App (DIY solution)
I am not sure how complicated that would be, but the blockerbug application could do the stuff and in the background it could have Bugzilla as a backed, so the Bugzilla process described later, could be controlled from the Blocker Bugs application. This would have a strong stable backend with all pluses and the rather Spartan looks could be replaced by more modern UI of the Fedora Bootstrap.
[1] https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/
Mailing lists
I would rather avoid this, as this needs a lot of attention, otherwise you might overlook some important part of the communication.
Bugzilla
Pagure
That seems the same to me. Only the medium differs. Maybe, the tagging is a plus for Pagure.
- People vote by submitting comments containing VOTE +1/0/-1 on a
separate line (and including any justification or feedback they wish in the comment as well; the command has to simply be on its own line so that we can detect it well).
The VOTE must be only +1 or -1. Indecisive people do not need to put that down, they just can do nothing.
Otherwise, I think it is ok.
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 5:59 PM Lukas Ruzicka lruzicka@redhat.com wrote:
- People vote by submitting comments containing VOTE +1/0/-1 on a
separate line (and including any justification or feedback they wish in the comment as well; the command has to simply be on its own line so that we can detect it well).
The VOTE must be only +1 or -1. Indecisive people do not need to put that down, they just can do nothing.
The idea behind voting is that we can distinguish people who abstain from the vote from people who haven't voted yet. The summary at the top of the issue (populated by the bot) could look like this:
Voting summary: *+2,1,-1* +1: kparal (hyperlink to comment) jskladan (hyperlink to comment) 0: lruzicka (hyperlink to comment) -1: lbrabec (hyperlink to comment)
Commented but haven't voted yet: adamwill fzatlouk
Because Pagure supports Markdown, we can create pretty summaries that actually contain links to where each individual provided their comment, without overloading the content with hyperlinks. We can also easily see who's missing from the vote, or perhaps mistyped their vote and hasn't been counted. The overall vote summary is displayed in the same format FESCo uses for voting "(plus votes, ambivalent votes, minus votes)".
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 9:59 AM Lukas Ruzicka lruzicka@redhat.com wrote:
- People vote by submitting comments containing VOTE +1/0/-1 on a
separate line (and including any justification or feedback they wish in the comment as well; the command has to simply be on its own line so that we can detect it well).
The VOTE must be only +1 or -1. Indecisive people do not need to put that
down, they just can do nothing.
Haha. In defense of 0, there is a long history of "abstain" votes. There may be a proposal that someone doesn't support, but also doesn't want to stand in the way of progression, i.e. it's better to move forward with something they don't fully like, than it is to be a stick in the mud.
The VOTE must be only +1 or -1. Indecisive people do not need to put
that down, they just can do nothing.
Haha. In defense of 0, there is a long history of "abstain" votes. There may be a proposal that someone doesn't support, but also doesn't want to stand in the way of progression, i.e. it's better to move forward with something they don't fully like, than it is to be a stick in the mud.
Well, I don't really see a difference between "voting 0" and "doing nothing". Kamil's idea to use it to see if people have or have not voted yet makes some sense to me.
I agree that it is better to move forward somehow, but I think that voting 0 is exactly the way to get stuck in the mud, as you are saying. In my opinion, if I want to move things forward, they way to go is to vote +1 (or -1) even if I am not fully convinced. It is necessary to make a decision. Voting 0, in my world, means that I absolutely do not know which way I want to support and therefore doing nothing is the same as voting 0.
As I already said, I support this asynchronous meetings, so this one only is a cosmetic thing and having a zero will not block me to use the system my way.
-- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 4:51 AM Lukas Ruzicka lruzicka@redhat.com wrote:
The VOTE must be only +1 or -1. Indecisive people do not need to put
that down, they just can do nothing.
Haha. In defense of 0, there is a long history of "abstain" votes. There may be a proposal that someone doesn't support, but also doesn't want to stand in the way of progression, i.e. it's better to move forward with something they don't fully like, than it is to be a stick in the mud.
Well, I don't really see a difference between "voting 0" and "doing nothing". Kamil's idea to use it to see if people have or have not voted yet makes some sense to me.
I agree that it is better to move forward somehow, but I think that voting 0 is exactly the way to get stuck in the mud, as you are saying. In my opinion, if I want to move things forward, they way to go is to vote +1 (or -1) even if I am not fully convinced. It is necessary to make a decision. Voting 0, in my world, means that I absolutely do not know which way I want to support and therefore doing nothing is the same as voting 0.
Abstain is useful if there are conflicts of interest, or to indicate no preference either way, or as a result of confusion. I chock up more than one abstain vote as an indicator the proposal isn't persuasive enough. Indeed if everyone votes to abstain, that means the vote was premature/ill advised and that the arguments in favor and against must be improved, rather than literally do nothing.
Abstain is useful if there are conflicts of interest, or to indicate no preference either way, or as a result of confusion. I chock up more than one abstain vote as an indicator the proposal isn't persuasive enough. Indeed if everyone votes to abstain, that means the vote was premature/ill advised and that the arguments in favor and against must be improved, rather than literally do nothing.
Generally speaking yes, however deciding whether something is a blocking bug (or not) will probably not fall into the category of premature or ill advised votes. I assume that the vote will only take place when there will have been at least some discussion about the problem, so people will probably not arrive into a situation when "they would not know much about it".
Also, I assume that the common group of people who regularly attend the blocker bug meeting are interested in casting the vote actually, so if they do not, you could take it as a sign that the vote is not clear enough.
I am perhaps projecting something, but I usually do not understand people who give up on their vote by placing an empty envelope in general elections to show that they really do not see a difference between the two final presidential candidates. I just believe they simply have not been investigating enough. I think also believe that throwing an empty envelope can be a sign that they do not want to take the responsibility to decide. However, since it is legal in the Czech republic, I live with that.
The same holds true here, if people say that they want to be able to cast a "0" for whatever reason, and we make it a legal choice, I will be fine with that. Basically, to have or not to have a "zero" option in voting is totally unimportant, when there are voices against asynchronous meetings. So let's not waste time in arguments about the "immortality of the cockchafer" as one of the Czech sayings says.
-- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 1:18 PM Lukas Ruzicka lruzicka@redhat.com wrote:
Abstain is useful if there are conflicts of interest, or to indicate no
preference either way, or as a result of confusion. I chock up more than one abstain vote as an indicator the proposal isn't persuasive enough. Indeed if everyone votes to abstain, that means the vote was premature/ill advised and that the arguments in favor and against must be improved, rather than literally do nothing.
Generally speaking yes, however deciding whether something is a blocking bug (or not) will probably not fall into the category of premature or ill advised votes. I assume that the vote will only take place when there will have been at least some discussion about the problem, so people will probably not arrive into a situation when "they would not know much about it".
Also, I assume that the common group of people who regularly attend the blocker bug meeting are interested in casting the vote actually, so if they do not, you could take it as a sign that the vote is not clear enough.
I am perhaps projecting something, but I usually do not understand people who give up on their vote by placing an empty envelope in general elections to show that they really do not see a difference between the two final presidential candidates. I just believe they simply have not been investigating enough. I think also believe that throwing an empty envelope can be a sign that they do not want to take the responsibility to decide. However, since it is legal in the Czech republic, I live with that.
The same holds true here, if people say that they want to be able to cast a "0" for whatever reason, and we make it a legal choice, I will be fine with that. Basically, to have or not to have a "zero" option in voting is totally unimportant, when there are voices against asynchronous meetings. So let's not waste time in arguments about the "immortality of the cockchafer" as one of the Czech sayings says.
Let's just say we have a long history of +0 votes in our IRC meetings, and they are quite frequent. I don't intend to change that in the async blocker process proposal. As you say, "it's totally unimportant", primarily because it doesn't affect the vote result.
-
Chris Murphy -
Kamil Paral -
Lukas Ruzicka