[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87h647yf8r.fsf@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2025 11:54:28 +0200
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>
To: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, corbet@....net
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, workflows@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
conduct@...nel.org, tab@...ts.linux.dev, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CoC: Spell out the TAB role in
enforcement decisions
On Tue, 04 Mar 2025, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org> wrote:
> Any decisions regarding enforcement recommendations will be brought to
> the TAB for implementation of enforcement with the relevant maintainers
> -if needed. A decision by the Code of Conduct Committee can be overturned
> -by the TAB by a two-thirds vote.
> +if needed. Once the TAB approves one or more of the measures outlined
> +in the scope of the ban by two-thirds of the members voting for the
> +measures, the Code of Conduct Committee will enforce the TAB approved
> +measures. Any Code of Conduct Committee members serving on the TAB will
> +not vote on the measures.
2/3 actually means 7/10 for the TAB.
Except two of the CoC committee members currently serve on the TAB, and
will not vote. Assuming they will also not count for the total, 2/3
means 6/8 = 75%.
All of a sudden you actually need 3/4 majority in the TAB to approve any
CoC measures.
Perhaps consider using a simple majority instead? The numbers become
6/10 and 5/8.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists