Re: Questions for Sruthi

On Fri, Apr 03, 2026 at 04:51:11PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Sruthi Chandran dijo [Fri, Apr 03, 2026 at 09:56:30PM +0200]:
> > > Do you have any improvements to this process that could help making
> > > mini-GRs more manageable?
> > 
> > I like the name mini-GRs :)
> 
> Ok, often naming a problem is an important step towards developing a
> solution for it. Congratulations on solving that first step! 😉

A bigger problem is that this sounds to me like a futile effort of 
trying to find technical solutions to social issues.

> > I just have some ideas, nothing concrete. Mini-GRs can be within a team
> > or if it concerns the whole project, among all the DDs. Instead of long
> > weeks of GR discussions, we can focus on reaching decision within a week
> > or two of discussion. We can also reduce the requirement for sponsorship
> > for the proposals. If our current voting system is heavy, we can even
> > think of something lighter.
> 
> So, in the interest of people (maybe including Sruthi) that are not
> familiar with the process, that's the way the Technical Committee performs
> their votes:
>...

The TC is a project-wide court for technical issues with 8 judges,
and an issue they are deciding on might ideally not even affect
them personally. The formal voting process does make sense there.

But a push to just outvote disagreements within a team could easily
create larger conflicts, asking a third party like the TC to mediate
would be a better solution in many cases.

>    – Gunnar.

cu
Adrian