From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms13.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4BSqFacagWeDYAEAqHPOHw:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 13:03:35 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4BSqFacagWeDYAEAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:03:35 +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=kXJ9NwO9; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b="BaF/afso"; 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), DKIM 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=1736514215; 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=odlBT8GuC5ZaEeLvZ7oVylGsCMTT5vH2HFQXoWaoG2A=; b=MRuju6YeqRQu5zcbU6F9fNpJnBqX/zcC+N9W7N3q5i9r2W8g5tx0wmw4jjqSEdVzzIHEWU Fzjp9NIsEoDt/PNr+nxnBSRBsfaWnD4Y3K0JpzZp4/lIbAEDF/eb/oieMJ+MxDmRiprvGl fB2ttRkk3I1ZygOxlf7w52pRwfP0xCVlCKl1h3L65SJ4laLyR4RznIWFq5IOrrbYNjpbr5 HKbKO+YAmRxivm/2og2ZK0ExcbG7cbCxNVNMeRl5DgyoSWMQgkF3zTJ+4WI9BtKSUftWHa 0EIV54Wa6GR6vC6Y/HtlrShWB3LNFxaMI8YLy08P0QX9jmN+g9yqBlabFURc+w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=debbugs.gnu.org header.s=debbugs-gnu-org header.b=kXJ9NwO9; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b="BaF/afso"; 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), DKIM not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1736514215; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=cwUkL3J0MAVx2Y0WuobVFXVZXc82iuaiJlk9CaKnklitiK6O+wfTof9p7efGaUOzuWWxuU ehCXp533UFxzse1crqZIMbERtW31g4axFbQVmimGRqXEt67+Rq4IaB+/OaUgaAwm0k45Qz ubxg6R+Og99UCDSeCiMfX9nykyjWM/h39u9GtlVtj3JqnXcgXODXI5AXOd3nrcmoKKRjbH SAfmIIwrEVjROHSfd+Rs5Xx5nhiiChcXsMevMJVtH4AzQ/eJzv5ZALX8CVsJj86wDnNCvd H1YRtiQeQlh1kRPvoOWPUs6Q3YT49zdqTxzEWzeQhmmueMUe401HrkYlJfzIQw== 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 D45CF1B6E6 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:03:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tWEfg-00056p-Jw; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:03:30 -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 1tWEfH-00054l-Fb for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:03:04 -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 1tWEfH-0002Cc-2A for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:03:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From:To:Subject; bh=odlBT8GuC5ZaEeLvZ7oVylGsCMTT5vH2HFQXoWaoG2A=; b=kXJ9NwO9kgPw/XNq6ROUraOScpsJyKy72mJak4Uyv2Qnama/ll1OYAtTa9RNn9zxO8vIkVCnyh8C1UAENC/VULkNtUPslZKosfm/8jh3p5nXNYmdbSnjXybR51wIfiLuWy5AZlNULHs5WQ1/vhCXbj1jMja3b8KU2IL0Ly0bP2cxFumvxxOhvnpKzx3ww1xjjDpi90EW7HyUDWnCkezdYKt000cq5hly218nmN1VXxFpGK4eXTfmbiY7u+nm/jmgJxjllyjOwyHf6GPHAvOom4u2iy73QoEdxpnGzVK8Ws7G08oGyW0Wiaw9VBQXfic/8JeFNERIAszXMO8+6JmTnA==; Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tWEfG-0000NL-S9 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:03:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process. Resent-From: Simon Tournier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 13:03:02 +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: Vagrant Cascadian , Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , 74736@debbugs.gnu.org Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez , =?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez , Christopher Baines Received: via spool by 74736-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B74736.17365141621382 (code B ref 74736); Fri, 10 Jan 2025 13:03:02 +0000 Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 13:02:42 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56698 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tWEev-0000MC-EA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:02:42 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::334]:42443) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tWEet-0000Lk-E1 for 74736@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:02:40 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4361b6f9faeso13147385e9.1 for <74736@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736514153; x=1737118953; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=odlBT8GuC5ZaEeLvZ7oVylGsCMTT5vH2HFQXoWaoG2A=; b=BaF/afsovMfWX3IWCk9311/q+DgBY0oOH2hg7kIahtPhQL4qvq5bS9IEyetmvvdtEE JPyb4tMdAmMJJMg9Ly6JJC8J6T5WKjy3sej4NanDSUaK/DsQ/Hgw2H5uQVx/D3NiqcAg gv4CNMLdPwXMp+5+hKmllVGzQFsEMwcttjihiKXfOzEnGx+IDqHfMICBVP7ghfZroZsV DW0OLUfBAZes6GB0oknc09Zc8Zqmkd6kRmEauUkqXxpnUo1TbpWeeQx8EaCxO1Q28Ws6 RqL5RamVt0uG5p+tlfcm2Jum90ZnNWi1K21ldZiGYl7HqIqm5aM+PNzSPiRJCsxc/gZ6 4U4g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736514153; x=1737118953; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version: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=odlBT8GuC5ZaEeLvZ7oVylGsCMTT5vH2HFQXoWaoG2A=; b=MjhlStXYUo17J7jlkKnx3JsBfzQuQ7l9vpg+rHAW9WXJqrwnBtnhhxNUspey+76hBH VQtANERy1XuM21vIi1O/D9ciUYVbmewVIP4IF59idFc0vljyrb9SII8ZcD+4Ptq6y4OJ J80TR01v1lebbrdBpydNIskBfEi0ApMS86biu0AxBpBgu9LmsRJc1zVsIeDYKr5vn8XI 5mqWqsyaovuWhssHSnN4hx2XAfsQWvN20NKFh+16BfDD6RxFeKA6oZkKlHKTFUI0cHj0 GKkjAnJlOtdUE1anz9WKAJJ7NvVJOlDZxHkAzS5WTvcARCgxs2WJPMG/3SfiB1gj8dxw eBjQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUW5/5NpJ39DdIdbqt2+H0Pa+DeAuhoI7k/y9m8pH8JFLu59NvqgN7dSTLq00E5vTsGwMqlKA==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxP4KtrbPKeslVAL3t9J0eHIrLpJQwf/8lL1Zj+HaKVchiuFrMC upA19k+S+yikW0Q+QLlW6qX3hDj9yFbAUAP5uF/6lIPGfoDgdQoB X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncu+xj0S2ptx1UVXJsODoFgc2efXP/nry8UfRdITQVTWDxiZVgVTy6zCMOzzKYv maF2gBt+M6Cx72o7ojCSdfK3AsH283DGqwJ/7C2i7QiWAqEECmURSf4pVg/1BrGsLgMAAC+rR5P QBXmd9QIH84pFKkrxDlulv+O3asDSSoiP5xhj2TyjWCQ/HdADFz+ct+KztFjOv59WJqC2PmOBFq c49EYk99o5fG3h/TZwadYN+l9ulMat9dSwNcdfVIlcoVSOh6hPmPpt6k0A2bfuhFoWDJNOgdrA/ vWfAXOLI8N9nRH/wFuncy8ebXaO3stIb/6Ejwft2fg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG7muwI3RnkxSvGyRCA3YqEAYS2w24J0ia0lgJU3RZA6Zx3ARO27+A/e0rkkBR6vlCnYCBmjg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:5918:b0:436:185f:dfae with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e881e681mr56046455e9.6.1736514152195; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-45.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr. [194.254.61.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-436dcceb374sm91977795e9.0.2025.01.10.05.02.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:31 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier In-Reply-To: <878qrjh56c.fsf@wireframe> References: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <878qrjh56c.fsf@wireframe> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 13:25:08 +0100 Message-ID: <8734hqluu3.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-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Scanner: mx12.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: 1.71 X-Spam-Score: 1.71 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: D45CF1B6E6 X-TUID: 08IX4TLZKXKq Hi, On Thu, 09 Jan 2025 at 16:40, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Is 'no one disagrees' =3D=3D 'no one replies with "I disapprove"'? It wou= ld > be nicer if there were more explicit alignment in the words used to make > that clearer, if that is, in fact, the intended case. Perhaps > literally... e.g. ... (2) if no one declares "I disapprove". I hope it is clarified with v7 [1]: The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*. WDYT? Maybe, =C2=AB (2) if no one declares "I disapprove". =C2=BB seems even clea= rer? > Obviously, one can and should declare their reservations as part of the > discussion that lead up to that point! Although maybe "I accept" should > come with the option to declare formal outstanding concerns? Well, that=E2=80=99s the distinction between =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D an= d =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, no? Somehow, the idea with =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D is =E2=80=9CI think it=E2= =80=99s the good direction although I have these concerns X and Y but I can with live all that=E2=80= =9D. Well, I think these concerns are captured during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Pe= riod=E2=80=9D and they should be included in the section =E2=80=9CDrawback=E2=80=9D or = =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D. WDYT? > Similarly "I disaprove" should not come out of nowhere; it should be > clear why, and perhaps worth having an option to note that in the call > for consensus at the end of the Deliberation Period? I agree. Does this wording v7 [1]: - =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the impl= ementation of the proposal. A team member sending this reply must have actively cooperated with for discussing the RFC during the discussion peri= od. See =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D. answer to your comment? In addition, =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D sec= tion contains: Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these conce= rns are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating me= mber disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternat= ives, proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status= quo. Therefore, =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D cannot come out of nowhere becaus= e the person who disapproves must comment during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D= on the why. That=E2=80=99s said, do you suggest that the reply =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2= =80=9D during the =E2=80=9CDeliberating Period=E2=80=9D should come with a summary about why? And such summary would be then included in the Document with the state of =E2=80=99widthdrawn=E2=80=99. > I also wonder if there is a supermajority of "I accept" over "I support" > this maybe should raise some sort of red flag calling into question the > proposal... as that is a very weak consensus and perhaps cause for > concern. Good point. Maybe this is the same as above about having these concerns written down in the final document under a dedicated section as =E2=80=9CDrawback=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D. WDYT? > All that said, I am a latecomer to this process... so take it however is > most helpful! Overall, it looks quite good to my eyes. Thank you for your comments. Cheers, simon 1: [bug#74736] [PATCH v7] Add Guix Common Document process. Simon Tournier Fri, 10 Jan 2025 00:45:51 +0100 id:87jzb3h7ps.fsf@gmail.com https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736 https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/87jzb3h7ps.fsf@gmail.com https://yhetil.org/guix/87jzb3h7ps.fsf@gmail.com