From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp12.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4789::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id 0NmrMVIZLWWFRgEAauVa8A:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 13:06:58 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4789::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp12.migadu.com with LMTPS id 0NmrMVIZLWWFRgEAauVa8A (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 13:06:58 +0200 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 6F520605D8 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 13:06:58 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=jsnGQzhu; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1697454418; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=FdHouCMlTzcGhPqWFgnmuJajWgCpevyBEBzDoR5TViVxIgPKSa4rRJwpaxP1UPnBJ/PUCu Zfm4eZuffL5biOr/qKadbL9yAVlZgVgWqrb7FkUruobmRADCtOZDXoqMXqoTI4JKSditXZ FFeFD6OJaTVIyvyB+4vipxgh4yP8v8AM9ogoc3Jc4X1AVwltNNthsnw5R1BIdtyVGzRnLe HpyN+TLCq8YdDZvCGH0K5BzQd/iHf2WlQk4W7GON5XPBce2vWB1Yf0XiKwsyUZHTZ/rmdZ X8O//2O6ff1U5+PjDNfMHy1eymidzOsh97k/gvbV2C6PRA8xYX5tMgWmcnyBuA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=jsnGQzhu; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1697454418; 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:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=KANeuOLeTv9wwLlvfiBrPvMdgGP2QlRt18flOKAoHEY=; b=AymDisDl/5aDt4acl99Oy0FZTUD/xxPzk2z+XSpPHV31uoLYBfzGlCQzyJ+OyWedaLZ6oG xQ4CLReYbf15HosyTH3HayU2w39TF8Jwn2ljX04lvmhqhR2SaJmr1IXMvSNrEyDHbN8p+z 8TLgdOwonkX+no7g8Y5e8FmRSFFXL0VDh2JAQcXtIoJe9yPOhj0GK/6FqvD16bSNBZTe3r Cug6Qsy7CYxVys/+dqpk+Wy23R3orQiEBlTVF7n4e2os8XlYTxxqjbrpFhifqaja+ZzUI+ 4ld6eBdQCAoN+IF15fX41Qo5eCg7ivZrqu4NFOQvEUtVRdF9L7fPgaAB+DeJYw== Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qsLQm-0007uh-6M; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 07:06:40 -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 1qsLQk-0007tw-Ed for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 07:06:38 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qsLQk-00038W-5e for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 07:06:38 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qsLR8-0002SS-HP for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 07:07:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#65866] Toward RFC? (was Re: [bug#65866] [PATCH 0/8] Add built-in builder for Git checkouts) References: Resent-From: Simon Tournier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2023 11:07:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 65866 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , GNU Guix maintainers Cc: Josselin Poiret , Mathieu Othacehe , Tobias Geerinckx-Rice , Ricardo Wurmus , 65866-done@debbugs.gnu.org, Christopher Baines Received: via spool by 65866-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D65866.16974543979399 (code D ref 65866); Mon, 16 Oct 2023 11:07:02 +0000 Received: (at 65866-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Oct 2023 11:06:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55376 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qsLQi-0002RS-Iu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 07:06:37 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x432.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::432]:38018) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qsLQd-0002Qz-Um for 65866-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 07:06:33 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-x432.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-32da42b8225so363483f8f.0 for <65866-done@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 04:06:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1697454361; x=1698059161; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=KANeuOLeTv9wwLlvfiBrPvMdgGP2QlRt18flOKAoHEY=; b=jsnGQzhueUBDbs0b6oh8r6wbEHrk9/IDZArdJGASka2FMCC0l6ruHBQmo0hTnv/IXe AY6EgpqvN27Kyb5g43Lr8Y57weCXqybLw3REdq2xn2+6Uhu7/1J5UBrOOrbkfKHGTRgg 2bbzZT1iBihNpMkfdeRdD8NOHfD9P4TutGHwuTmtgeKEH6rqwhdJpXF2dFfZDHyVUpHL kx1phRPVDvAY7dz6NYpLBgTuXCk37KTURMQv9Y9kfwrx2Z4KoTxISGHRH+0XVdVstAHf uDTyFG2IyF4aiAgylYTy95xJR1SlnL77t65nNU4xvbtVuye/9ayas+zrGqRcrSQmvsWs wZ+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697454361; x=1698059161; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=KANeuOLeTv9wwLlvfiBrPvMdgGP2QlRt18flOKAoHEY=; b=noYGiKP/GEuC+yiPjkoP3IC5ddeo4q7UGnrix2sg/g68fv0Vq7GFQQh6Qh1iGeb4bc z87frz00X2alic25mDLe7FkqH0n3u431rnSqd4kcF3c3KGHKw9kvR6FdC4TOgB6WQB6r en7O9qV6mjTpQBEKIFplksK53N0eY2qP21DAf5Q4tzQe5v1KA8XmTgVhPDLKCTLJQMml 3I4QKrE1wQWUnPIVbvNZgt5bGWN4LkRrDVNhShgUBxjgyu14A6bKibPn9yMSt2nP+iya wOzOT8kEY/5i51kF1UGNRw8c83wOFnx4iAo2fvyax+lsFUUIIFu0m43+3566meNEpTZ+ nZYQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YytyJEhfUZ2CrxCdg6A7PhG+mizFbWbhArZ6PCZoOu+wgTmliJG hgXNESCvXAo6vqaS8xWqLX0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGJkIRDae53E8Sq737+TmPqxdP4NQN2jFVTYqRUnKWsd3nLnQdw8mz5wZcTl1vLwutrG/vh+g== X-Received: by 2002:adf:a1c1:0:b0:32d:a818:a755 with SMTP id v1-20020adfa1c1000000b0032da818a755mr3166700wrv.2.1697454361278; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 04:06:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pfiuh07 ([193.48.40.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t9-20020adfe449000000b0032db8f7f378sm1279020wrm.71.2023.10.16.04.06.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 16 Oct 2023 04:06:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Simon Tournier In-Reply-To: <87zg12s7wy.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2023 11:11:25 +0200 Message-ID: <87jzrnq6de.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Scanner: mx1.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: 2.82 X-Spam-Score: 2.82 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 6F520605D8 X-TUID: MPPBQKibrvKW Hi Ludo, We are not on the same wavelength about some technical parts. It does not really matter =E2=80=93 we could tune our frequency separately on some random occasions. :-) However=E2=80=A6 On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 at 17:02, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > I think it=E2=80=99s important in these discussions to make sure we start= from a > shared understanding so we can remain focused and productive. =E2=80=A6I am, between sad and upset, by this part. It appears to me unfai= r or uncalled for. =C2=AB A group using consensus is committed to finding solutions that everyone actively supports, or at least can live with. =C2=BB [1]. And I am sorry to say that we have a failure here; at the root (Guile-GnuTLS bug report). And it is a group failure. Elsewhere in this thread,, I have expressed =C2=AB I am not convinced that = we reached a consensus about this series. =C2=BB. Why no one is asking if I am blocking this patch? Anyway! Thinking more than twice about why it bothers me. If I feel a failure about the consensus, then it is because the process fails from my point of view. Why? Because an implementation detail is missing. It had been expressed several times. Notably: Time for a request-for-comments process? Ludovic Court=C3=A8s Wed, 27 Oct 2021 23:22:50 +0200 id:87cznqb1sl.fsf@inria.fr https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2021-10 https://yhetil.org/guix/87cznqb1sl.fsf@inria.fr And this kind of change =C2=AB Add Git as hard dependency =C2=BB should hav= e been part of such process, IMHO. Because considering how the current decision process works, it is impossible to get this =E2=80=9Cshared understanding=E2=80=9D if you have not been here at the right moment. How can I acquire this shared understanding? For example, you said that Git or TLS or etc. on daemon side are not part of the TCB because they are used for fixed-output derivations, I disagree and I still think it is incorrect. The problem is not my disagreement =E2=80=93 I can live with= it, as many others ;-) =E2=80=93 no, the problem is that you refer to implicit decision that I cannot digest, question or ask explanations. Somehow, I do not have some gauge for evaluating my own expectations. It appears to me that this patch falls under similar circumstances as an idea expressed here: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Ludovic Court=C3=A8s Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:13:28 +0100 id:878rgga1qv.fsf@inria.fr https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-03 https://yhetil.org/guix/878rgga1qv.fsf@inria.fr Now, Guix is probably reaching a point where we deserve more structure without much burden for making decisions about changes of some category. Therefore, let turn my own frustration here into a concrete proposal, I will send this week a Request-For-Comment process inspired by Rust, Nix and Haskell ones. Cheers, simon 1: https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus 2: https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/gnu-guix-maintainer-collective-expands/