From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e16b::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms13.migadu.com with LMTPS id CMUGItOofmfqKgEA62LTzQ:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 16:33:23 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e16b::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1.migadu.com with LMTPS id CMUGItOofmfqKgEA62LTzQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 17:33:23 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=debbugs.gnu.org header.s=debbugs-gnu-org header.b="DXXKd/n/"; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b=L+0h2D1f; 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"; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (strict), DKIM not aligned (strict)" header.from=posteo.net (policy=none) ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1736354003; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to: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=gwQYF4+ZEZOnWyrGSP3SdbtIZKxTU+ZZ1bMWgnf+A8w=; b=X9QE8OjR24uhv3azRtOPZw9KppJPv2kiVcAP6jgX3r15/RZUdJytkzDo5KykIf6nal1I7A ZIhi9a5CuWQXtnqgrr4q5LirBDpzwPgWIEt9MvAZfD+QOqXJBNQzhOQ1q8f5hy/NcAG/fd pIDmzQSFR67aGyTq92X3B3fDUD3vi+K/eleuNXicz8Qgt9PKOSWasCiqXXkKsk2SwEpbs8 NhXJBftar1fzihqxK7BL0/RaZs0YIbEz7xZc4iZMqD0leHCVjkOCEdpJO/Ac2ys1aFBj8V b3I2C+lrvwG5O1W0N0dTCaj+5g+WJQe06JhbDQTsSh5jblkp3xjwPlaQR3YJAQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=debbugs.gnu.org header.s=debbugs-gnu-org header.b="DXXKd/n/"; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b=L+0h2D1f; 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"; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (strict), DKIM not aligned (strict)" header.from=posteo.net (policy=none) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1736354003; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=GsMSMq0x0yHUKgo5droEzflzOHDi5/Hf/BZnU9GElhzNsvsWpTLoG4OahSv8rljph7fGTZ 3KlYxsVfTgi1Mwbp7GKwW4b/zxsm5FTvqyqWKIVjRNvgPj5uKnVhs+Oj9oDizwo19U/FOJ 8o9GuFe9BTijV7WGutQRIT4JKHOoENNMzjTv4AOF4SFUnK5nVmUPqHsv0ib8U5ugSAdkVK Sddhm/15bSX8dqHitnWAdY8HazCNbyfgHZl1jrT+d+d4+ItBd6RgZHDNvrrWYK3Qk9rIfJ QE3x5+v0d1Q3k6LY80hjjwq0DjyBnkgDUrZwq1VFpy87iLSyxbR4NDR+fs4N9Q== 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 24C115F864 for ; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 17:33:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tVYzL-0004H6-TL; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:33:00 -0500 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 1tVYtb-0003S0-Fd for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:27:03 -0500 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 1tVYta-0006Tj-9b for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:27:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=In-Reply-To:From:Date:Mime-Version:To:References:Subject; bh=gwQYF4+ZEZOnWyrGSP3SdbtIZKxTU+ZZ1bMWgnf+A8w=; b=DXXKd/n/yWDIeVr49qZxM4Ox8ZrXqiukCf5+MKIdP3Mg4XCwkRgenDodTxAlDPiTInc4QlIdsjHNyO1pin8BZfwhFnMuPm/0nHgQhd6Qdd2+cKpMkAwj/UtgjHSzW8a0pWS98C//chB2aOVb1zNEAhNeGXtNax7FvNG3rmyrJcCSag9lcp4dyvxKLRS03yGFeCz3Dacb3hqLWXVf4JnqQsW3uQjkDvEYC87Ya7zYxq2wNqpUmOiNyaN+3ISPpw0H4lMigtZmr9oqXLaTZAsNCvMVYdMxW3EckJamyhq/IdKKa70R9nY5M8uAB1EhYQ6gw29h/LRR/kz9h54WX3JkbQ==; Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tVYtZ-0003Lm-QC for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:27:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. References: Resent-From: "pukkamustard" Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 16:27:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 74736 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: <74736@debbugs.gnu.org> Received: via spool by 74736-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B74736.173635362012871 (code B ref 74736); Wed, 08 Jan 2025 16:27:01 +0000 Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jan 2025 16:27:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48640 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tVYtY-0003LX-Ac for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:27:00 -0500 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:35711) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tVYtU-0003L3-0A for 74736@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:26:58 -0500 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD525240027 for <74736@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 8 Jan 2025 17:26:46 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1736353606; bh=pOvxP0usRYuZZWeMc6kpwAZVG9duSPtSUkXMN1a7LhE=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id:From:Subject:To:From; b=L+0h2D1fvCzcQGcvIJZUuK+mFTaZnzlEPZmE50rPoQf8JJYa0GsuYkTB8+wtVgpEO Dudd8CFsmLJgYYUhtHPEHfuGEjX4hCJ21GkGhtx0DXaH0zR2QLm5ujiq5Oqu/wveX2 JPoebyWotcjPT8RqO7YIxBbb/TVmXyelW/9IODfRTsJ2eOFkaWJ4TxG8MAX3ZUegeo V6yvYEe2gF+qpcfsIyffYQ5wsEa7EzrFvV7qyaV/O3YS4ZBh1rHYEvCv4zibJ+1HRY 6ao64tvBwV3A4rNnJ9dPPS7CpKFIKqjLPb7o7UrWdHtyFaiKJVcEwP0E3chqxFbK7H Q9fCQP/Waauvw== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4YStbV0Bgfz9rxY; Wed, 8 Jan 2025 17:26:45 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 16:26:40 +0000 Message-Id: From: "pukkamustard" In-Reply-To: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:32:58 -0500 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-Queue-Id: 24C115F864 X-Migadu-Scanner: mx13.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.27 X-Spam-Score: -3.27 X-TUID: sLb9jQRWPcqM Thank you all for working on this. Some comments: - I had to think if I am a _team member_ or not. The term is not defined in= the document. I think this is mostly due to there not being a RFC on teams (y= et). Still, to make the Process RFC understandable, I'd add a brief explanatio= n of what team members are (i.e. members in etc/teams.scm).=20 =20 Likewise, I think the Process RFC would be simpler to understand if feedb= ack is required from a fixed number of team members instead of a percentage. = I believe there has been some discussion on this, that I have not been able= to follow completely, so ignore if already discussed and agreed upon. - The term "supporter" is used for two things where it's not clear if it's the same: 1. People listed as supporters in the RFC metadata. 2. Team members that respond with "I support" during the Deliberation Period. Furthermore, in the section "Submission Period" it says that authors can look for supporters. But the wording in the "Deliberation Period" suggests that the "I support" emails should only be sent in the Deliberation Period when the final version is published. =20 For example: Ricardo replied with "I support". What does that mean when t= he Deliberation Period has not yet started? I think what is meant is that supporters can be recruited at any time and team members responding during the Deliberation Period with "I support" become supporters and will be added to the list of supporters in the metadata. This should be clarified. - The term "final" is overloaded and underused: 1. "Final" is a state of an RFC. 2. In section "Discussion Period" the authors should publish a "final" version. But this is not a RFC that has state "Final". 3. In section "Deliberation Period" a valid response by team members is "= I accept". The RFC is also described as "accepted". The term for the sta= te "Final" is not used. =20 I'd suggest renaming the RFC state "Final" to "Accepted". =20 - In Section "Deliberation Period" the team member response is "I disapprov= e" but in the next section the term "disagree" is used. I'd use the same ter= m for clarity. - The "I disapprove" reply is only allowed if member actively proposed alternative solutions during the "Discussion Period". I feel that might b= e a bit of a strong requirement as that means you can not disapprove a RFC if= you only see it after the "Deliberation Period" has started. Maybe that's ok = as RFCs need to be announced to guix-devel. Still it might be a bit strong. = Maybe something along the lines: "A team member sending this reply must explain their disapproval and should suggest constructive changes to the proposal= that would make it approvable." - I think the name "Guix Consensus Documents (GCD)" would be slightly funnier - a play on greatest common divisor (as mentioned by Simon). But I think RFC is a term that is more widely understood and that's fine. =20 I'm not quite clear what this means, but: I support. :)=20 I will be afk during the Deliberation Period (and not present in Brussels) but I think this is an important step for Guix and am fine with being added to the `supporters` field. -pukkamustard