Voting

I agree that an explicit Web form would be much more effective than input gathered via email. Email is fine for discussion and to air the issues, but (especially on hot-button issues) is quite skewed towards the people who have the time for endless discussions and who get passionate about everything.

I also agree that a popular vote is not a good way to make the final decisions on important issues that affect the entire community. As (I think) Hal pointed out, too many people vote with only limited information or insight, or without carefully considering the issues. The information gathered from the community using Web forms can be weighed carefully by a neutral and representative advisory board — or in some cases, the Foundation board — in making overall decisions.

—Vikram

// Vikram S. Adve
// Professor, Department of Computer Science
// University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
// vadve@illinois.edu
// http://llvm.org

I proposed on the git hub move thread that a more organized method of gathering feedback be used. A short form that gather important information about who the person is, how they contribute to the LLVM project, how they use it, and how a github move impacts them. We would of course ask if they support the move and why/why not.

The problem with the mailing list is that the ones with strong opinions can really overrun the people who don’t have time or aren’t as comfortable expressing their views against those who strong opinions. It is also extremely high traffic, lots of responses inlined.. it can easily get muddled.

By using an organized form to gather feedback, you get an idea of who is in favor (or not) and exactly why. You also learn a bit about the person who is voicing their opinion and how big of an impact it has on the LLVM project. I also suggest a well communicated timeline for gathering information and decisions.

I think the LLVM Foundation can create an advisory board with people(board members and not) who are interested in helping determine the end results. This is exactly the sort of area the LLVM Foundation should be helping with as its very administrative and we already pay for and oversee the infrastructure. It also was created to be a neutral role in the community. Obviously the goal is to find the solution that is best for the LLVM project.

I don’t personally like the idea of a popular vote as its extremely difficult to decide who has “voting” rights and to keep that sort of system up to date. I also don’t think popular is the only metric in the equation. Lets picture a scenario where 2 large companies who contribute to LLVM are on opposite sides.. but the one pro git-hub wins because of a purely popular vote. So that large company forks LLVM. I don’t think thats what would be best for our community.

-Tanya

-—Vikram

// Vikram S. Adve
// Professor, Department of Computer Science
// University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
// vadve@illinois.edu
// http://llvm.org