From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id oNyLM5YOfGFTewEAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 17:09:10 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id 0DJBL5YOfGHgLAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 15:09:10 +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 3DF022DD3B for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 17:08:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:36858 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mgTUb-0007gV-AP for larch@yhetil.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:08:29 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54110) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mgTUJ-0007gH-Fq for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:08:11 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:38994) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mgTUI-0004th-TK; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:08:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=T+oZ4xBXjniGVxfIRz6OqtIWxxrAUIEAbV0Vok1QI2k=; b=axPydJ0xnAaVoqC622lO 7K7DUAGCE+ZzlEpVTPa9/9JDWCVxQ7wl5M4c8aVHaduKgWKMe4zCfivk76wU0xHpAMCfKucbIvIk0 H8v5j6yXpN9cibLyZJR/9QIDc3Wi71dwjWPOP737AdULX/yGo/7EgDGZDDGKEIVV94wD1vu+/syA3 ybxRPFwluyUTpiF9maACpGhMuxsgen1YwUmmO1AFdk8qF/xnLc9IPjDdrmnSLlwXmPrDezmked8eX 1LU91Xvd81UMJC3oWEZsB07nKUsO0V4waLA/b9bGflOyZFGfnI5NlfgObaRmYjp0+fL/6eOJYXeZ3 ZRK1CExCePW/bg==; Received: from [193.50.110.158] (port=55582 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mgTUG-00006j-76; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:08:10 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Thiago Jung Bauermann Subject: Re: Time for a request-for-comments process? References: <87cznqb1sl.fsf@inria.fr> <87zgqu9k75.fsf@gmail.com> <3347007.yCl91LDo8C@popigai> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 8 Brumaire an 230 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 17:08:05 +0200 In-Reply-To: <3347007.yCl91LDo8C@popigai> (Thiago Jung Bauermann's message of "Wed, 27 Oct 2021 21:07:06 -0300") Message-ID: <878rybzx62.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: , Cc: Guix Devel , Katherine Cox-Buday Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-TUID: u++AgRpGMDLz Hello! Thiago Jung Bauermann skribis: > I agree that guix-devel is a good place to announce new RFCs, probably=20 > using an eye-catching subject prefix so that we can more easily see and=20 > filter them. > > For RFCs where users are also stakeholders, we should also announce in=20 > places where users are likely to see them, such as the info-guix and help- > guix mailing lists, and possibly even the Guix blog (how far out do we wa= nt=20 > to spread the word?). > > =E2=80=9Cguix shell=E2=80=9D would have been an RFC with users as stakeho= lders, but I can=20 > imagine others where that isn=E2=80=99t the case, such as some significan= t but=20 > internal code reorganization. Yes, that makes sense to me. We have to make RFCs visible to users when they have a direct effect on them, as is the case with =E2=80=98guix shell= =E2=80=99. So I suppose RFCs would be at least announced on guix-devel as everyone suggests, but additionally on info-guix or the blog when we think users need to have the opportunity to chime in. As zimoun wrote, a big question is formalization. I haven=E2=80=99t yet ta= ken the time to look at those other project RFC processes I mentioned, but we should do that. Important questions are: how do we determine whether a change is important enough to be RFC-worthy? How do we determine whether it=E2=80=99s accepted or withdrawn? Perhaps that will unfold broad= er questions about structuring and decision-making. If anyone feels like giving a hand of this formalization effort, please feel empowered to do so! Ludo=E2=80=99.