[csw-maintainers] tech board?

[Philip Brown]

This was taken from a longer reply to a different email. I think it
may merit separate discussion. . Up to you folks.


Ben wrote:
>  I agree that votes can be useful, but I submit for
> the record (again!) that for a group our size, they're far too much
> overhead just to overrule the opinion of a single person.
> [..]
>  My preference is for people
> to agree to disagree and move on when they're outnumbered as that is
> what happens in real life.  _Most_ people already do this.


When "a majority" of the group have spoken, this makes sense.
However, "for a group our size", having even 3 or 4 people chime in on
a technical issue, does not constitute a majority. It could be that
the majority is actually against the 3 or 4.

In contrast, if you think having things decided by a smaller number of
people is "more efficient"
or something, than having full membership votes, then I would suggest having a
"technical board"
put together, so that sort of thing could be worked out faster.
In that sort of situation, if the tech board is X people, and (X/2)+1
agree on something, then it could be considered settled.

I think the problem here might be that you may think that (you+personX+personY)
already compose a "tech board", so if those people agree, you think
everyone else
should give way.

To which I say, if you wish opencsw to work that way, then make the
"tech board"
a formal entity.
Until then, the only really "everyone's opinion is equal" appropriate
way to resolve deadlock,
 is a full vote, to make sure that everyone's opinion is equally heard.