On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:26 AM, Michael Busch <[email protected]> wrote: > This whole thing feels like it's been pushed through, and while I'm > not against the updated proposal anymore (I voted +0), the bad > feeling that consensus wasn't really reached remains.
But: this vote is not expected nor required to reach consensus. We as a community are very used to only pursuing things when they reach [near-]consensus, simply because nearly every biggish topic we discuss must first reach consensus. That's a very high bar and it blocks many good changes (look at how many times we've broached relaxing back compat policy...). This change does not require consensus. It requires only a majority to pass, which it has achieved. Yes, it's contentious, but a change this big will always be contentious, and this is why Apache requires only majority for it to pass. Mike
