Project:Requests for comment: Difference between revisions
(ce.) |
m (ce) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Hypothetically, a '''request for comment''' would occur when informal [[Project:Consensus|consensus]]-gathering fails to yield a satisfactory outcome and a more formal decision-making process is necessary (i.e. a decision can't be deferred indefinitely). | Hypothetically, a '''request for comment''' would occur when informal [[Project:Consensus|consensus]]-gathering fails to yield a satisfactory outcome and a more formal decision-making process is necessary (i.e. a decision can't be deferred indefinitely). | ||
One of the [[Project:Principles|principles]] of Librarybase is that "Librarybase should be governed by clear processes accessible to all users." This means that, for a valid request for comment to take place, there first must be [[Project:Consensus|consensus]] on what the | One of the [[Project:Principles|principles]] of Librarybase is that "Librarybase should be governed by clear processes accessible to all users." This means that, for a valid request for comment to take place, there first must be [[Project:Consensus|consensus]] on what the process should be. Agreeing on a process before the occurrence of a dispute ensures that the creation of the process does not itself get tied up in the dispute. | ||
Latest revision as of 02:57, 11 July 2023
Hypothetically, a request for comment would occur when informal consensus-gathering fails to yield a satisfactory outcome and a more formal decision-making process is necessary (i.e. a decision can't be deferred indefinitely).
One of the principles of Librarybase is that "Librarybase should be governed by clear processes accessible to all users." This means that, for a valid request for comment to take place, there first must be consensus on what the process should be. Agreeing on a process before the occurrence of a dispute ensures that the creation of the process does not itself get tied up in the dispute.