From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Cc: "Andreas Enge" <andreas@enge.fr>, 宋文武 <iyzsong@envs.net>,
"Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>,
"Christopher Baines" <mail@cbaines.net>,
guix-devel@gnu.org, 61894@debbugs.gnu.org,
guix-maintainers@gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 23:36:39 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874jqtte7c.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86lek6ntpb.fsf@gmail.com> (Simon Tournier's message of "Thu, 09 Mar 2023 10:46:08 +0100")
Hi Simon et al.,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi Maxim,
>
> On Wed, 08 Mar 2023 at 12:05, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On a side note, it would also introduce some kind of hierarchy in the
>> group, which I dislike. One of the things that make Guix special is
>> that it's pretty flat -- everybody can participate at the same level, at
>> least between committers). I'd rather we don't try to emulate Debian on
>> that point.
>
> Hierarchy already exists, as in any social group, as in any group of
> people collaborating. The hierarchy is currently informal.
>
> And it is not really “pretty flat” because some individuals from that
> group have more (informal) power than other. That’s not necessary a bad
> thing. :-) For instance, the access to the build farms is restricted,
> the ability to restart Cuirass job is restricted, commit access is
> restricted, money spending is restricted, etc.
Apologies for starting a tangent (which is interesting in its own!).
Rewinding to the beginning, I believe the novelty proposed in this patch
is (quoting the original message):
> With the proposed policy, members of a team would also have to review
> and approve each other’s work. Formal approval means getting an
> explicit “LGTM” (or similar) from at least one other team member.
In other words, to give teams the power to gate the changes touching
their scope. That's reasonable, if we have functional teams. I'd argue
we aren't there yet. And also:
> I think it avoids the unavoidable misunderstandings that can arise in
> a growing group and help pacify day-to-day collaboration.
Again, "pacify" irks me a bit in this sentence, given I consider
collaboration has and continues to be cordial in our community, unless
I've been living under a rock.
--
Thanks,
Maxim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-10 4:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-01 16:13 [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Ludovic Courtès
2023-03-01 17:15 ` Christopher Baines
2023-03-01 17:59 ` Björn Höfling
2023-03-01 18:17 ` Christopher Baines
2023-03-01 19:21 ` Felix Lechner via Guix-patches via
2023-03-01 22:45 ` Ludovic Courtès
2023-03-02 11:04 ` Andreas Enge
2023-03-02 13:57 ` bug#61894: " bokr
2023-03-03 1:08 ` 宋文武
2023-03-07 1:53 ` [bug#61894] " 宋文武 via Guix-patches via
2023-03-07 10:36 ` bug#61894: " Andreas Enge
2023-03-07 12:22 ` Simon Tournier
2023-03-07 18:29 ` [bug#61894] " Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-07 22:40 ` Leo Famulari
2023-03-08 18:58 ` bug#61894: " Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-09 8:48 ` [bug#61894] " Simon Tournier
2023-03-08 9:12 ` bug#61894: " Efraim Flashner
2023-03-08 17:05 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-08 23:38 ` Vagrant Cascadian
2023-03-09 5:12 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-09 9:46 ` Simon Tournier
2023-03-10 4:36 ` Maxim Cournoyer [this message]
2023-03-10 17:22 ` Ludovic Courtès
2023-03-10 18:22 ` Felix Lechner via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
2023-03-12 2:33 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-12 11:14 ` Simon Tournier
2023-03-12 3:26 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-12 11:52 ` Andreas Enge
2023-03-13 0:08 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-12 12:25 ` Simon Tournier
2023-03-15 16:08 ` Ludovic Courtès
2023-03-17 15:46 ` [bug#61894] " Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-10 14:19 ` bug#61894: " Andreas Enge
2023-03-10 17:33 ` Simon Tournier
2023-03-10 23:19 ` Andreas Enge
2023-03-11 13:20 ` Simon Tournier
2023-03-07 15:21 ` Felix Lechner via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
2023-03-06 15:48 ` [bug#61894] " Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-06 21:42 ` Ludovic Courtès
2023-06-02 13:50 ` bug#61894: " Ludovic Courtès
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-03-13 16:30 Peter Polidoro
2023-03-14 15:58 ` Maxim Cournoyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=874jqtte7c.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com \
--cc=61894@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=andreas@enge.fr \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=guix-maintainers@gnu.org \
--cc=iyzsong@envs.net \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=mail@cbaines.net \
--cc=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).