[bug#62246] [PATCH] doc: Add a reference to a page explaining consensus decision making.

[bug#62246] [PATCH] doc: Add a reference to a page explaining consensus decision making.

[Maxim Cournoyer]

This is to make explicit something which until now had always been implicit.

* doc/contributing.texi (Commit Access): Mention that committers are expected
to employ consensus decision making.
---
 doc/contributing.texi | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/doc/contributing.texi b/doc/contributing.texi
index 911c3a7bbf..4db0fdc76e 100644
--- a/doc/contributing.texi
+++ b/doc/contributing.texi
@@ -1728,7 +1728,11 @@ project for at least 6 months.  This ensures enough interactions with
 the contributor, which is essential for mentoring and assessing whether
 they are ready to become a committer.  Commit access should not be
 thought of as a ``badge of honor'' but rather as a responsibility a
-contributor is willing to take to help the project.
+contributor is willing to take to help the project.  It is expected from
+all contributors, and even more so from committers, to collaborate in a
+consensus decision making fashion.  To learn what consensus decision
+making means and understand its finer details, you are encouraged to
+read @url{https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus}.
 
 The following sections explain how to get commit access, how to be ready
 to push commits, and the policies and community expectations for commits

base-commit: 933051281fbed0ae71bd40c24a701faf2a02791c
-- 
2.39.1

[bug#62246] [PATCH] doc: Add a reference to a page explaining consensus decision making.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Maxim,

Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> skribis:

> This is to make explicit something which until now had always been implicit.
>
> * doc/contributing.texi (Commit Access): Mention that committers are expected
> to employ consensus decision making.

[...]

> -contributor is willing to take to help the project.
> +contributor is willing to take to help the project.  It is expected from
> +all contributors, and even more so from committers, to collaborate in a
> +consensus decision making fashion.  To learn what consensus decision

The first sentence was hard to parse at first.  Perhaps a slight
improvement: “… from committers, to help build consensus and make
decisions based on consensus.”

Otherwise LGTM; thanks for working on it!

Ludo’.

[bug#62246] [PATCH] doc: Add a reference to a page explaining consensus decision making.

[Maxim Cournoyer]

Hi,

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi Maxim,
>
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> This is to make explicit something which until now had always been implicit.
>>
>> * doc/contributing.texi (Commit Access): Mention that committers are expected
>> to employ consensus decision making.
>
> [...]
>
>> -contributor is willing to take to help the project.
>> +contributor is willing to take to help the project.  It is expected from
>> +all contributors, and even more so from committers, to collaborate in a
>> +consensus decision making fashion.  To learn what consensus decision
>
> The first sentence was hard to parse at first.  Perhaps a slight
> improvement: “… from committers, to help build consensus and make
> decisions based on consensus.”
>
> Otherwise LGTM; thanks for working on it!

I've applied your suggestion to my local branch, thanks.  I'm CC'ing
guix-devel and guix-maintainers to make sure everybody is informed of
this proposed change.

It's still time to voice any concern you may have with this suggested
change.  I'll leave it open for a few more days.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

[bug#62246] [PATCH] doc: Add a reference to a page explaining consensus decision making.

[pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)]

Hi Maxim and all.

Maxim added to doc/contributing.texi:
> It is expected from all contributors, and even more so from
> committers, to collaborate in a consensus decision making
> fashion. To learn what consensus decision making means and
> understand its finer details, you are encouraged to read
> @url{https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus}.

Only now, that it is already pushed, have I taken the time to read
(or, at some point, skim) the link.

I just want to acclaim:

* I agree with the addition of this kind of writing.

* Seeds for Change is more politically left than I first expected, and
  the consensus sub-page uses not only examples that chime well with
  free software and Outreachy, but also one-sided views on issues like
  housing.  Perhaps such examples will prompt dissent in the future.

  It would have been an option (a worse option) to add consensus
  decision making to the manual without linking to such an extensive
  text.

  Nonetheless, the way it is written, the manual asks for agreement
  with consensus decision making, not with Seeds for Change or the
  examples on the consensus page.  I still agree with making people
  learn from the link.

* It is good that, when there is little feedback, you have pushed it.
  Seeds for Change say: take “sufficient time”, but IMHO you did and
  more time would not have helped.  Also you had already taken steps
  like writing to guix-devel and generally applied the Seeds’
  recommendations.

Regards,
Florian

[bug#62246] [PATCH] doc: Add a reference to a page explaining consensus decision making.

[Maxim Cournoyer]

Hi Florian,

"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> writes:

> Hi Maxim and all.
>
> Maxim added to doc/contributing.texi:
>> It is expected from all contributors, and even more so from
>> committers, to collaborate in a consensus decision making
>> fashion. To learn what consensus decision making means and
>> understand its finer details, you are encouraged to read
>> @url{https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus}.
>
> Only now, that it is already pushed, have I taken the time to read
> (or, at some point, skim) the link.
>
> I just want to acclaim:
>
> * I agree with the addition of this kind of writing.
>
> * Seeds for Change is more politically left than I first expected, and
>   the consensus sub-page uses not only examples that chime well with
>   free software and Outreachy, but also one-sided views on issues like
>   housing.  Perhaps such examples will prompt dissent in the future.
>
>   It would have been an option (a worse option) to add consensus
>   decision making to the manual without linking to such an extensive
>   text.
>
>   Nonetheless, the way it is written, the manual asks for agreement
>   with consensus decision making, not with Seeds for Change or the
>   examples on the consensus page.  I still agree with making people
>   learn from the link.
>
> * It is good that, when there is little feedback, you have pushed it.
>   Seeds for Change say: take “sufficient time”, but IMHO you did and
>   more time would not have helped.  Also you had already taken steps
>   like writing to guix-devel and generally applied the Seeds’
>   recommendations.

Glad you found it pertinent.  I had read the whole thing for the first
time, and found it had useful tricks or suggestions, and was good at
clearing any misunderstandings I had about consensus decision making.

I hope others find it useful too!

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim