From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp10.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms9.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4HQzO0y0DWRxLgAASxT56A (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 12:15:25 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp10.migadu.com with LMTPS id 6JZBOky0DWQMJwEAG6o9tA (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 12:15:24 +0100 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 B9663EF5E for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 12:15:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pbJfL-0007ID-Fh; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 07:15:03 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pbJfI-0007GY-8p for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 07:15:00 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pbJfG-0007A7-DF; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 07:14:59 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id p4so2657951wre.11; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 04:14:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678619696; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=bcd9ydmVXXBzGsyu7De1lvneY/l3r0XF6kjZyTdj+NQ=; b=iGHCiRZdQT9pxe7/LPKoUhoETtQoGX1/iWNy6o/Sl3sFdZTZxtL1NGUagIysSM8N4f LGazYdKMirRpvevZp4iIFfm5uvd3uLeYFjHXc/zzJkz68cdUVcR+8K+gsVVlZg0LLq0s Ptyi7YK3tMrdFyyVbBSKWa1gNq0UxerI8xsvJL3sJ980Orpq14sSjwWmc+OeE35tVqE7 wxbHnHJAdqZ/S9cZBplAOmW35bfZHEx47HrWnS5hI7JhSaFQI5xKO+ECM4ZBnXU1dCyF XsuI7Qu20Lb6zffiswva4sgdGcTBN8M1ER+2bx70tIMxwHGrbpaptS5JKJLtn7XYWu5p dW0Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678619696; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=bcd9ydmVXXBzGsyu7De1lvneY/l3r0XF6kjZyTdj+NQ=; b=HFQBoQhN2l2VCJjoRQN/5dLNXAxt0nCgyxsQB6kPOB05UT8gY4QDr0w708RZZMGPt+ K1YgdWgdVxVpbrr0DQuzL1UEKiF0uS7lCwGlGWLA5LtExIZbNvBXcRPXiNTBaQLf+TvZ eZslPBSGs+LOd7G2YLsAwB+Z3hAX9l2YyYpCprtgC79STMriijfp58/jKBo3S/hlcuOR lrAzPByJ9Wa23jKjMf4VFYBBj6xWofdiWCxvevOwgCr3OQs6YXPxilU4TBxMR6mY29K+ GHV/7fLJ7gT93Qta6MJrJx1VKXK5VwNPI+UeJwq7wM8nTnlH+0Wuf7ru6WUAq4Zp8fB7 CIng== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWA5ccd76nzhaSB0lYsiHAPRPFHrtFMKuLNkhMHhExYxNE4FtcW vHokF6QQ7gLZbx1CXTu+k4qw1tUBfpU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+yhiVQI5RYtuAkllMMQuBP0wwuU7g5R537srf/bhK+zbDBlxR+6V3UhY82LeGoJvAzp2PZtA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:ec11:0:b0:2ce:a773:1150 with SMTP id x17-20020adfec11000000b002cea7731150mr2388558wrn.6.1678619696088; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 04:14:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:65d2:2476:f637:db1e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w12-20020a5d680c000000b002c5526234d2sm4762594wru.8.2023.03.12.04.14.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 12 Mar 2023 04:14:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Simon Tournier To: Maxim Cournoyer , Felix Lechner Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , Andreas Enge , =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= , Christopher Baines , guix-devel@gnu.org, 61894@debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches In-Reply-To: <878rg2r95i.fsf@gmail.com> References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@inria.fr> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@cbaines.net> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@envs.net> <861qm0da4y.fsf@gmail.com> <87sfegwh28.fsf@gmail.com> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@gmail.com> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@gmail.com> <874jqtte7c.fsf@gmail.com> <87bkl0frnk.fsf@gnu.org> <878rg2r95i.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2023 12:14:52 +0100 Message-ID: <86bkky9q6r.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::42c; envelope-from=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com; helo=mail-wr1-x42c.google.com 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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: 2.1.29 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-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=iGHCiRZd; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1678619724; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=L8BJgMzEP/V2kC0SDj/QHk7Kk7Aime416ALPhTffPRMuhkw2eqNeK1FxPoLZRbkgqEbzU+ NpnbJQ3MGGYB8dWyx2f11A35px50oNYL0c+bIAxSmqbMUm5Mk7eOoMONWAe2jZ9w2uYfrm c8f97/RhfRDJFcJPGzRrAJeQVY/wgrBDB8RwrvXGdd/hbM797p6gkho/yk31qx4U98ywK8 0cwE5PwzyoFLlTNzWthPWG/hUQcHHcMfQ14hmRtQH+VQbxvoD9B+N2hSO5fzZeWWqwgpWw s/FiekS/C1blphEcs1wFnNM0+HK3IG+EnILx2+HMHgMp+cMxFjao89kCEABvaA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1678619724; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=bcd9ydmVXXBzGsyu7De1lvneY/l3r0XF6kjZyTdj+NQ=; b=KP+9s6XgNxpf7xvUO4h4peotEAZ6itCudgQ+iRwfYLzVmnvkNyM4t9c89BNoQQGFZDoyAK eiof6uM66jUuiJaiu56mx3FGIdJnZVTKNFR2bIoAh2GyMIky4yITZf5lj0wxPaYEF4OXKc lPT6hn76Bhv+iax6fagDdDqvFzxbTHyq8iS5Jo4Wr8rbYC3mSxAyscq3SGUXz/sWTAFtvX CkBx+KUPnqNkqD1m5CsYvsoXD4V+gVs3RlJdt0anmDzkwm/n1684dlit60e+/keGOoFQMH oMdiDYtMMkrvC89ntubAMNavkINDQG1e+krt82VeC3aGp8aJwvcCQeh9Y1Nzmg== X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.94 X-Spam-Score: -4.94 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: B9663EF5E X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=iGHCiRZd; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com X-TUID: UoS2rt6SG2z7 Hi, On Sat, 11 Mar 2023 at 21:33, Maxim Cournoyer w= rote: > It may help to shed a bit of light on the original reason I think this > change came into existence, and in the interest of transparency and > hopefully improving or finding alternatives to the proposed change, I > consent to Ludovic openly discussing it, even if it involves a healthy > dose of critique and looking inward. There is no one original reason but several diffuse situations. Well, I have tried to provide the context and the intent behind the patch in this message here: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-03/msg00121.html Although I agree that the wording of the initial Ludo=E2=80=99s proposal is= not the one I would like, it does not appear to me so crazy to ask another LGTM for some part of the code. Double-check leaf Python package is not worth and it adds a lot of unnecessary burden. We all agree here, I guess. Double-check core packages or Guile build-side code sounds to me totally reasonable. The initial wording of the proposal, --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- +When your patch falls under the area of expertise of a team +(@pxref{Teams}), you need the explicit approval of at least one team +member before committing (another team member if you are on the team). --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- cannot apply for all the teams. Again, we all agree I guess. However, this proposal appears to me totally sane for what is under the scope of the team named =E2=80=99core=E2=80=99 for instance. Instead of a strong opposition, the patch needs an update. Cheers, simon