Re: Re: PEAR Group: Package Proposal Handling

Lukas, I don't think you understand what I'm saying... The math is still the same, but the procedure is standard and not goofy when you don;t use the offset. The outcome results in the same, its just not as sloppy. - Stan Lukas Smith wrote:

From: Stan Lemon [mailto:insyder@myrealbox.com] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 6:48 PM

Not to be obtuse or anything... but the majority vote system would imply that your five votes for approval would also change :-) Hmmm... 40 ney 5 yeah Who wins? (What I'm saying is the majority should always win and

there

should be none of this confusing offset junk)

the offset is there because we felt it makes sense to only allow things that improve the current set of packages. Remember that we don't want redundant packages etc. So if we let in packages "too easy" we might end up with all sorts of issues in terms of having to break API's etc. We are aware that this means that a vote that adds up to +4 would then fall through the cracks. However this just means that there is some more work to do on the package and then it might get through with a second voting. regards, Lukas