On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 5:15 PM Geoffrey Marr <gmarr@redhat.com> wrote:

I wasn't intending the time we would get together each week for voting, instead for time spent discussing and clarifying any discrepancies we may have with the bugs. By the time we would have this 30 or so minute get-together, our votes would already be cast in Pagure. We would make sure we were all on the same page, and then use the meeting time to mark the bugs as "Accepted ________".

I like the idea of somehow merging the live meetings with the asynchronous process. Personally, I think the meeting I'm describing should be solely purposed as the "Acceptance/Denial Meeting", where the point is to review the votes in Pagure, and then manually accept/deny the position. That way, we spend a small portion of time on each bug, not voting, but reviewing the votes that should have been already cast. And, if any questions arise regarding a particular bug, we have a platform in which to have a real-time conversation with our peers.

OK. So what do you think about this?
We'd use both the ticketing system and also have our regular Monday meetings. Simple or non-controversial tickets would get resolved through the ticketing system throughout the week. Complex tickets or tickets with balanced number of +1 and -1 votes would get further discussed and decided in our Monday's meeting, the same way we always do it. This keeps the advantage of reducing the meeting length by weeding out simple tickets in async manner. It also keeps the advantage of pinging/CCing developers and letting them respond/vote async. And not just developers, anyone who can't make the meeting can still provide their feedback in the ticket. And finally, this allows us to test the async approach without making a full switch.