From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4NY8Gz1gYmDnKgAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 01:18:21 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id qUEeFT1gYmCPMgAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 23:18:21 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EE3CD61B for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 01:18:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:53750 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lR19I-0002Jp-7b for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 19:18:20 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56654) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lR199-0002IU-2M for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 19:18:11 -0400 Received: from mail.zaclys.net ([178.33.93.72]:36379) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lR196-0004iO-4X for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 19:18:10 -0400 Received: from guix-xps.local (82-64-145-38.subs.proxad.net [82.64.145.38]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.zaclys.net (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 12TNI4cO033341 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 01:18:04 +0200 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.zaclys.net 12TNI4cO033341 Authentication-Results: mail.zaclys.net; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=lle-bout@zaclys.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zaclys.net; s=default; t=1617059884; bh=D0dmwRl6muEWyYtCUcFK+xXlQtxPQwcOoBIWE2Konok=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Loo/LfDtxVAY3gpgHavr/p5rPyB78dGNzZHi3RUicnjZrtDC5IDuT6V3HVJAas4Nu 1UCXldvP3tU5FtVqNw97CV+9bP1WlGu2ZYMWd+NWRXucbx76/gRh/76hLdxAzYupbG Q7ABsS11wT6lLLT466AjwDZJefPGVqTL/OU3CV3Q= Message-ID: <35efe3776747ef36d6eec350843428fa0abf22fd.camel@zaclys.net> Subject: Re: GNOME 40 work should be done on Savannah (was: Re: GNOME 40) From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?L=E9o?= Le Bouter To: Mark H Weaver , Christopher Baines Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 01:17:59 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87eefx36ni.fsf@netris.org> References: <0323e477b9226759445ad7c58bad134fcff4bc40.camel@zaclys.net> <878s67dmwn.fsf@netris.org> <878s669zqf.fsf@cbaines.net> <87eefx36ni.fsf@netris.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-msojk7UG+unzKoUc6DhK" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.33.93.72; envelope-from=lle-bout@zaclys.net; helo=mail.zaclys.net X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1617059901; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=D0dmwRl6muEWyYtCUcFK+xXlQtxPQwcOoBIWE2Konok=; b=FxrIgK5eKll/fTPalIhFuyHzZaaIeNKZ8Ow0GQYGksEBwL3nUHJsXUuXQzvt1VUGrcuclN j2xYkzkyRrx0LOjNZrjbze0Hn7Xk66g5Lebh0vDhVsI1HBFQ7zNeFo69hzFAQLUyqo60Zj OOzmT8dbKhKo15tSzHZ8Y7ZD6EO6HMJ1A4Qkk1CNJYUCH3yToU8uXKDFOc/oIONYykKxjc En1LYYIEuiLhWlz5zhxLBIGf0Y0UYYK5sCC9bg9iicrOqMs/DBIMpdfaxPueQUruq5VBFt njDK0GNk/J02HgMXso2iPqlWBcaAZA48Ibkmu6pgVTMeJLpYvY+lrcf1egaPqA== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1617059901; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=ScUZP0g/UjxXVoJqxIxEVjAwJ1BLQsV+TdvraJaQQ9SxgdtdtIs9DdUSt1KDyoaAfKzBxu WSCVQCQ2WybmCznEfu9uzRGOeBex3vBID7gpPU5XokpmU8/rm5x/HFzsUXs+WXvzJGZqqB TH0aCKsxB+UT70gdMsER0wBYhCIZ5SqT1pzkcMNciPBIrMW9qLVa06mfpmb46oS3t4jXts LEuNwyIIU3Nn/dpHJCeY2o88yXTtMx3dAomcpeRjDt6sTQuGa4uBekrsBzLeR8m2/bBNyy MQWYd9EHNGUSe7gJUj4DSSJJmcDTTWXUSPlxQrpams+FiLHHxh4o0d0ebuD4xg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=zaclys.net header.s=default header.b="Loo/LfDt"; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=zaclys.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.72 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=zaclys.net header.s=default header.b="Loo/LfDt"; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=zaclys.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 0EE3CD61B X-Spam-Score: -3.72 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: silKSzZb35r9 --=-msojk7UG+unzKoUc6DhK Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello! On Mon, 2021-03-29 at 19:02 -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote: > This sounds theoretical. Concretely, what needs do you have that > aren't > being met by Savannah? Per-branch access control > I don't understand this. It seems to me the opposite. >=20 > If I want to contribute to this external 'wip' branch, I need to > arrange > for access. Ditto for any other Guix committer who wants to work on > it. > That's added "bureaucracy" entailed by your approach that would not > be > needed for 'wip' branches on Savannah. Cbaines is more responsive and has much lower requirements than what the "Commit Access" for GNU Guix itself requires. It's as if we created a third party git repo for both of us Raghav and myself then collaborated there except through Cbaines's infra we get CI infrastructure for free. > On the other hand, maybe your point is that you'd like to allow > direct > commit access to this 'wip' branch by people who don't have commit > access to Savannah. If that's the goal, I find that objectionable, > because when this branch is finally merged, all of those commits will > suddenly get dumped into Savannah. That increases "risk" from my > perspective. >=20 > I actively do not want commits getting into Savannah without an > existing > Guix committer taking responsibility for them. Your approach > effectively creates a loophole for non-committers to potentially > introduce many commits into the official Guix repository in a way > that > is likely to not get adequate oversight. Why would it not get adequate oversight? It's just an easier way to collaborate on patches, but the patchset would be sent over to guix- patches before getting merged to master or else. In general I don't agree with such gatekeeping of access to wip branches because it actively hinders the development of GNU Guix by non-committers, and many non-committers would like to get involved more but they are barred by the commit access requirement. > * * * >=20 > I'd strongly prefer for this work to be done on Savannah. If this > were > a fringe branch of marginal interest, it might make sense to have it > elsewhere, but this is core Guix desktop work that's likely to be of > interest to a large segment (plausibly a majority) of our community. > IMO, it belongs in our official git repository. >=20 > Thoughts? >=20 > Mark The people that work on it now are Raghav and me, and Raghav does not have commit access yet, so that's the only way we can work and cooperate now. We don't have a choice. If and when Raghav's commit access application is approved then we can move to Savannah. I don't feel like people should be barred to contribute to that GNOME 40 upgrade because they arent an approved committer. That doesnt feel inclusive to me. If you want to work on this GNOME upgrade however, that help is more than welcome, in this particular situation probably we can work on getting Raghav's commit access application approved then your concerns will be sorted out as no other non-committer participant seemed to show up. L=C3=A9o --=-msojk7UG+unzKoUc6DhK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEFIvLi9gL+xax3g6RRaix6GvNEKYFAmBiYCcACgkQRaix6GvN EKbQAw/+PnsdBoFk2wwiv02ezpSYwovDXR7/kZxWp2/LDmvEYj7XNgsIszT9PCV8 Do6Hy+vCUpPbt2Kx9gFAG65pkRUGGZbbsk264Fk4ikY2ot6qYMMxF0eRFOMMfDPG sn5QZOxDh6Ti5GrJ0ry9NK2QTWpwKCxJT3Hrzm87BDdJACw9+njudJNoRFw0Iz0d xCEEgFk/1NFJA4tpdf+kZ3kCqLwRc1ZEKc2O+CPR6kwY2IE8A4ggSMI00H1et9bX EiOXPTxLaircYTJNow8+tWYb7JiKUgUvhR30dH4MhFYAbwC4C4hdfR8T2R7r37lC PLAQ9/ftinCUW5v+N3gqOxcscs9duxoQMwPVkYFaMwH5Xe0pgLsSON243PQ0ghZI 0WIqnAIv43M6VT22shQYvTLm5SpqCkgY31Fy9RyBy0ETXUmo+K9qiGflw+zvARCS Eppv/scNGjBA4tse95Yw4iLfPX0Ruy3Dx4A8Q0kJvvSIMY3d2ynxeDZNk0guioAX q23Q/wmr8TYQKwtsV3/ys+3PitcBPgn4Axq+4iEhi4+1tHbl9yztNiqp9Nfu229S ko2cGRool3Oe8rtoIqTTCUDbt47ffPmrmEwUxOeaEqp2ly2MONHfWYhKzSNP1fTH mq+xa58GhPsgrmsi+Z7mZjAypVdfvQTeHMVnChb5mh1e8rM6jOI= =wsxS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-msojk7UG+unzKoUc6DhK--