Re: CALCITE-2458 Use of Kotlin for unit tests
I can clarify my *interpretation* of what it means. My interpretation may
not be the definition we collectively agree on. I assume lazy consensus is
employed when a change is expected to be potentially controversial. If no
objections are raised, then it's safe to assume the change creates no
controversy and lazy interpretation. If objections are raised, then I
believe lazy consensus has *not* been reached. I wouldn't interpret these
objections as a veto, but I think objections raised during lazy consensus
should be addressed before moving forward.
Le mer. 26 sept. 2018 à 04:51, Vladimir Sitnikov <
sitnikov.vladimir@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> Michael>if we're going to use the term "lazy consensus" we should agree on
> what it means
> Could you clarify what it means?
> Does that mean "absolutely no responses"?
> Does that mean "a single -0 comment destroys lazy consensus"?
> Does that mean "a single +0 comment destroys lazy consensus"?
> Does that mean "any vote less than +1 kills the idea"?