Re: Boost Governance?

From: Hans Dembinski (hans.dembinski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-05-18 08:56:53

Dear Mateusz,

> On 18. May 2021, at 09:49, Mateusz Loskot via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 09:41, Hans Dembinski via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> On 18. May 2021, at 09:22, Dominique Devienne via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 1:01 AM Mateusz Loskot via Boost <
>>> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> - Only Charter Members can vote for proposals acting
>>>> as individuals according to their individual point-of-view,
>>>> wearing their personal hat for the best interest of the Boost.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Anyone should be able to vote. Those "other" votes are just non-binding,
>>> but are still tallied. To show the wider community's opinion(s).
>>> 
>>> At least that's how it works in the Apache (Java) OSS community. --DD
>> 
>> It is also how we review new library contributions.
> 
> In the idea sketched up earlier, I deliberately consider library review
> a significantly different process from making project-wide strategic
> decisions. An author can show up on the list out of blue and
> propose a library, collect support and submit for review. It is possible
> because libraries are reviewed purely based on technical merit.
> 
> That is different, I think.
> 
> Disclaimer:
> I'm not defending my proposal, which I aimed to keep brief.
> I'm only offering some further clarification.

I personally like your proposal. My point was that a community vote even if not binding, is useful to inform the decision-makers. There has to be a clear distinction between the binding and non-binding votes, of course, to avoid the noise you speak of.