From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp12.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e16b::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id mAYxHH58SmWIDwEAauVa8A:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 19:05:50 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e16b::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp12.migadu.com with LMTPS id mAYxHH58SmWIDwEAauVa8A (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 19:05:50 +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 255A15383C for ; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 19:05:50 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=MlzVHU8e; 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 (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none) ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1699380350; 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=MgFIrICgNedbKET3xiwRmIO3OqCnN9j1qZ0ylYlTAkI=; b=jRLwbTtjEbPjI9xryFDox1b34iRmM7YhcexAfCdB9C9jnVArxaAQYDF11Ek0IEnLrc9HSk Whojz1oHenyCUzFnU0NiA6iP/MPBuohZ3aKEuP0hLS/bLfjcu8vp1jku2i8TaC9aQ673mS AU7g5107HYC6gCXTgFpb6+7i++aBSSsbVwZxXmVYgjWhWT/uvJF7ZqhnZXMLoni7ylJnDb t0O9u9ubdkIhCrZzF6MOdy1oTxyXxRLSF/EpQfN/Q+9rjVCNkKns7rqbLP8zPUP4N8ZywM jXxDAcHKOmTFzKBGHNtdjiF7o0r8hrPYx8oCOddUwNBD7aKfQPuijz7QzE6hJg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=MlzVHU8e; 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 (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1699380350; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=uaU+B35qCssLVBemyiPRUk26wJ+imzo80or7GbewVrFoAmpuVPMLnvaU1D3dLH6W3ZfzWq X5a3py5iF/2AY8brM6XhE4MP2JhGyF1Rn+f+FlIDTxNBTkREdiypepTdbR0wYkheNw5GG1 FKZ/ed//k9Nw+EV43WvMmXOFJOUVAPBeOV/cFiUr9r5lNWIJ/Mu2axxyQJ4vK5GCxwAUbN dWBw2XYjTJ78CUk1Tj8pdRPIHQ2jRXPXInNeqmxyT9vlVKu5LokgZ4V3xdmTXAajTlzts5 thUpbyIz1JzsfKO9VCXqmTD3qVCrj1py5CmerZUQ3VSTo3lhPOX10fL7vSAPNA== Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r0QSK-0005Bk-MZ; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 13:05:41 -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 1r0QS6-0004xU-RX for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 13:05:27 -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 1r0QS4-0001iT-RF for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 13:05:26 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r0QSg-0000R5-G7 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 13:06:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#66430] [PATCH] doc: Mention the responsibilities that blocking comes with. Resent-From: Maxim Cournoyer Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 18:06:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 66430 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 66430@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 66430-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B66430.16993803611668 (code B ref 66430); Tue, 07 Nov 2023 18:06:02 +0000 Received: (at 66430) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Nov 2023 18:06:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43257 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r0QSe-0000Qp-U4 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 13:06:01 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-x32f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::32f]:44071) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r0QSc-0000Qc-Vd for 66430@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 13:05:59 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id 46e09a7af769-6d30d9f4549so3832507a34.0 for <66430@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 10:05:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1699380315; x=1699985115; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=MgFIrICgNedbKET3xiwRmIO3OqCnN9j1qZ0ylYlTAkI=; b=MlzVHU8eKrtiHHYcgd15OsQYV57+t1P2QhMEuAaPOV7AIxeRAZPSuHttyBhssHkCDV yOHa2wHGQtZyNjaDb53u7Jg/LzGwFP8XLZVHlocOyq2HDQbGSOlHJwRpUZ0WnzBsWB2U rf27DYo32kLeO1UGZ0YFQcXn6RmH0UtJ76GaZufORi8TxuY2ySQ85CYWdGTGzsa/HQ+B Nn2iZqSBadY5+fuj6dDhTh3esifF7LTrLmfSajeCfCQwtAEwSmXyyLNmc4Oe1ylesQvW aML6QeGl/AU9qPsX5Lh2JngtrWfXvSHbjQ0Vvmlc9czMa87CtLDHVIkTGvxCBamcBvo3 Q89g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1699380315; x=1699985115; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent: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=MgFIrICgNedbKET3xiwRmIO3OqCnN9j1qZ0ylYlTAkI=; b=xRFZp1bT9ekvBDn18DXvFmS9TuDQhCKK/QZPaPEUMC4q2Eb2urQA50eZURAtLKjtg3 /mbS6N93Foh/NqE22XpjXDg/rPuJjWW+auvRe0ttZvgglycOR/eZnlu4gDa2h9qevzia 3rcBpNJ5vL+903VPzKuC87Dvc8X3+3Vin9jivFwKYmNleoF6g5MlIkmX9g7B+EXHpDgM 6EgKVat3NK7yQc1augRqvrnsHakDfscyQLzicSutcC+FrCF8sxleL+STu8PgfB7heR/y 7UeDRG13EfkmGT+EsRp+4Rs9Q57qx+HA0ZVIiJiEwDiRdGaMIpjxsWOrL3FeR1IhZ3eW H6Xw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwDAQXI+trI8H8N6VzDpZf5EnyOM0Y68ctO7QNdra3IQDE/X14F T3Xt8iIIoXcpX9lLen2xRnt+hXoT7eu0vQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHKI0wdLt79PtkbkKLu9DvYW7AAvAKmPe2RGL3RGhIiI1kdu7ZT46sS/GGhPuU/CKI9QBdUhg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:14cb:b0:3a7:7bd3:7ab7 with SMTP id f11-20020a05680814cb00b003a77bd37ab7mr41711231oiw.51.1699380314715; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 10:05:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from hurd (dsl-10-130-87.b2b2c.ca. [72.10.130.87]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c10-20020a05621401ea00b0065b11053445sm131430qvu.54.2023.11.07.10.05.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 07 Nov 2023 10:05:14 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer In-Reply-To: <87il6gyv6w.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?="'s message of "Sun, 05 Nov 2023 18:19:19 +0100") References: <5760a46dfc1b97312d1d5512ebf1bd21da6707f5.1696903067.git.maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> <87h6mwrhl6.fsf@gnu.org> <87pm1j7opm.fsf@gmail.com> <87il6gyv6w.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 13:05:12 -0500 Message-ID: <871qd1jv6v.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Spam-Score: 2.89 X-Spam-Score: 2.89 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 255A15383C X-Migadu-Scanner: mx13.migadu.com X-TUID: a+vBs+zcyOOn Hi Ludovic, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > Hello! > > Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > > [...] > >>>> +@url{https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus}. The project uses = the >>>> +@samp{Requiring people who block to help find solutions} block varian= t, >>>> +which means a participant wishing to block a proposal bears a >>>> +special responsibility for finding alternatives and proposing ideas/c= ode >>>> +to resolve the deadlock. >>> >>> I=E2=80=99m unsure about this. A situation I have in mind is this: a v= olunteer >>> writes a review describing issues with a proposed change that have no >>> obvious solution, or rejecting the change altogether (for instance >>> because it=E2=80=99s deemed outside the scope of the project or tool). >>> >>> How would one interpret the reviewer=E2=80=99s responsibility in this c= ase? >> >> It's a good question. Hopefully there'd be more than 2 persons >> participating in the conversation, in which case there may be some >> consensus emerging that the proposed change should be rejected. If >> there's no consensus at all and nobody is willing to iterate on the >> idea, then the issue should also be abandoned. > > I think maintainers/committers have a responsibility that passersby do > not and cannot have: they must keep long-term maintenance in mind and > they define the project=E2=80=99s scope. A newcomer or occasional contri= butor > may not share that vision from the get-go. I think the distinction between occasional contributors and committers should not matter too much in the context of establishing a consensus: instead of a plain "no", people with more experience in the best place to share to newcomers why they think things are better left the way they are (explain the rationale for the status quo). A consensus should hopefully emerge from that, or a refined way forward that everyone agrees improve on the status quo. Similar to the aim of the recently added review guidelines, this would favor active engagement or at least dialogue rather than plain, veto-like refusal. It's more work, sure, but that's the trade-off implied by using a consensus-based decision process, I think. And if, by some kind of luck (?), a large amount of newcomers were to come and start discussing and agreeing to rewrite the guix-daemon in VBA, appearing to form consensus, the idea/code could be gated by a decision from the co-maintainers group. This is a last resort "veto" right that should be seldom used, just like an individual contributor's block. >> I submitted this change hoping to encourage active participation toward >> consensus, and to "raise the bar" for using a block, which should seldom >> be used according to the consensus guide. It'd be easy to otherwise >> abuse it, at the detriment of the group. > > Yes, and I agree this is a worthy goal. My only concern would be if it > gives an incentive for maintainers/committers to never say =E2=80=9Cno=E2= =80=9D. Saying > =E2=80=9Cno=E2=80=9D is an important part of this business. :-) I agree it's an important role of reviewers and committers to be able to offer a critique of a suggested change, saying why they think it's not an improvement. I don't see this new guideline as an obstacle to it, although it will ensure the rational for turning an idea down, if needed, has been well discussed and understood. --=20 Thanks, Maxim