| Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [EXTERNAL] Get clarity on process for obtaining consent to add a spec to EE11 |
|
From: David Blevins
dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Jul 11, 2023, at 7:54 PM, Edward Burns <Edward.Burns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: David Blevins
dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date:
Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 20:37
I’m a huge supporter of ranked-choice voting for things where there is a limit to how many winners there can be. In this case, we’re not constrained and “no winners” needs to be a valid option. I.e. if people can only cast votes for a spec to be included and can’t vote against a spec being included, how would that work? edburns: I was thinking the ballot should consist of all the possible choices of {MVC, Data, JNoSQL, and none}, similar to the
distinguishable balls in indistinguishable boxes problem. Voters would then rank their choices and the winner would be selected. For example, {none, none, none} is a valid vote. Yes, the ballot would be long, but that’s not a problem. So the intent would be to have a single ranked-choice vote with these options? Data_yes JNoSQL_yes MVC_yes Data_yes JNoSQL_yes MVC_no Data_yes JNoSQL_no MVC_yes Data_yes JNoSQL_no MVC_no Data_no JNoSQL_yes MVC_yes Data_no JNoSQL_yes MVC_no Data_no JNoSQL_no MVC_yes Data_no JNoSQL_no MVC_no (making sure I understand before commenting) Edburns: Yes, that is correct. Then, we would run a separate ballot to decide what platform variant would have those specs. Ed | edburns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx | office: +1 954 727 1095 | Calendar Booking:
https://aka.ms/meetedburns | | Please don't feel obliged to read or reply to this e-mail outside | of your normal working hours. | | Reply anonymously to this email: https://purl.oclc.org/NET/edburns/contact -David |