New voting system

John Arbash Meinel john at
Tue Jul 17 17:02:33 BST 2007

Hash: SHA1

Aaron Bentley wrote:
> John Arbash Meinel wrote:
>> Actually, my big comment is that we lose the +0,-0 comments. They
>> weren't exactly clear what we were trying to say,
> They were, it's just that we weren't using them as defined.
>> but having a way to say:
>>   I don't like this implementation, but if other people are okay with
>> it, I'll acquiesce.
> Abstain?  My use case for abstain is Kent's left-align patch.  I don't
> particularly want it in, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to
> reject it.  However, I *do* want it to stop showing as pending in *my*
> queue.
>> I guess my point is that I would tend to use "resubmit" as +0, but that
>> removes it from the pending queue. Rather than giving someone else an
>> opportunity to review it.
> Yes, that's the point.  We've got too much stuff hanging around in the
> "pending" queue that's not really pending review.  Most of the cases
> where people use +0 are better served by "resubmit".
>> What I would like is to have a way to give a slight rating on a patch.
>> Then after it has had some time for other people to look at it, come
>> back and call 'resubmit'.
> I'm trying to avoid having a confusing array of choices.  Would you
> consider starting with abstain, and seeing if it works?
>> I suppose we could use 'comment' for that. I can put a comment on it
>> now, and come back later for an approve/tweak versus reject/resubmit.
> You can do that with "abstain", too.  The main difference is whether you
> want it to appear in your personal pending-review list.
> Aaron

I'm certainly willing to try it, and let you know how I feel about the
final results.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


More information about the bazaar mailing list