Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Resource to object conversion

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023, at 10:18 AM, Máté Kocsis wrote: > Hey Everyone, > > Sorry for the radio silence, I was busy with other tasks. However, I > managed to improve the RFC in the recent days the following way: > - most importantly, I changed the suggested approach of the conversion in > case of primary stream resources: the is_resource() hack mentioned a few > times > before would be used in this case. > - I added impact analysis for each resource category + listed all functions > which return streams (even though they are not impacted). > - I added more examples, reasoning etc. > > Please read the updated proposal because I intend to start the vote shortly > after the holiday season. > > Thanks, > Máté I'm concerned about the 3 way vote on the first item. Requiring a 2/3 majority on a 3-mutually-exclusive option setup doesn't really work, mathematically, and it's very possible for that to result in no conclusion. (Or vote splitting, if 3/4 of voters want to change but split on when, would that result in do-nothing winning?) Since "do nothing" is one of the options, I would recommend an RCV/IRV vote here. The rest of the RFC looks good to me. --Larry Garfield