From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp11.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms9.migadu.com with LMTPS id KMl4GA3BCGRSbgAASxT56A (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 18:08:29 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp11.migadu.com with LMTPS id GO+AGA3BCGTNdgEA9RJhRA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 18:08:29 +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 2525022BD7 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2023 18:08:28 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=qGhX6elT; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1678295309; 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:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=rcA2ntdi1P93OKb94hYMjJno3exAoB1Jy20Gum/qByI=; b=Gk63y27PMzenh8f0dMn/pysEp++EPyKTbRl3LHfaYSt2JASK+qk9YEymBpcEG007z7U+hS vMiInR3Q3zRUjUlxSu44UUadvk4HL2pMJLxAGIDKCu5S2TcMpmfXJ90/PUwTTbRgMwE/mq GCm3o/20AvAEVRuMx9h8GAndAw02M51BoZ3jyKVbnmP2K/y5He2Cpp161n22Cu+WOsI6/2 qhjB/tqudNhDl5w+YkPCsEsW18mMUYaJmhjb2COi/RB6VYD2zzdtnlYkKCeuLr4bQO4pab m3S6DFSxdPCH+CHmV45nrLL9Va3TLZYTzb2PXWEBdO2C6E/q9DbQgM+QQHGXAA== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1678295309; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=spDigRPIWSkKpur6CN8kIoftMPMxQ5e09DEkspIgGSWaDToehQkEVCRpAs0gg87zTcPaUI N+SHrG8CYkOQ6mfTsQd83fmZWmLwwztqaoItgsLDWnwmhKnVxGNfDyy4gABYfXrqEcQT+A IklhcfT6c5+VtDbaLAXXAcIHbjofIaifUKnkefvltEMlyw6jUp+tr+Z2suHX/vx43dNXI8 8hGt7YOCFVe1kHyH0NEP9aSEu5125m0GrxFEpSiCQMCqBceTWx/MAw5WM7wEh+2kg9slAQ GoNzesSMPlSW2ixaVnJ05NeW19K726fFatxVTqadQ9vZwUcHgU3Z5QxzDv+UWg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=qGhX6elT; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pZxEU-0006F7-Nh; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 12:05:42 -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 1pZxEK-0005yj-5u for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 12:05:32 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::834]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pZxEI-0005w5-6F; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 12:05:31 -0500 Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id c19so18746566qtn.13; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 09:05:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678295127; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=rcA2ntdi1P93OKb94hYMjJno3exAoB1Jy20Gum/qByI=; b=qGhX6elTrZYtFdnAO3DJ1IaRsMfkyqLUuZY1Q9ZPTY6bwYIudPyqFeZv1c3Hm7bOLN Szu4+vo5hXMskvx7dWYtVlTF2jdzK5gRRi+nXMnFgaxTk24DjxvkgCFgRUXO/4o5Re1A a4uhzde3ZY82/Cxm4SaT/MYbx9wcdhG7w6WRhSTN3tFlsccJ9d0KW0rJH7ZT7EQxu4DL /98pIRjDyTnRwpx4YMqc8wUD5qNSuT7XmPM+NY5yZN++zKx4MOnJvDnneYPnNqO5Uvmd UxQCBJcIdObzmw8zkZTzKT81VJvBkWtHXXswUNXbsg0uvGDfNUEPlUPx4ol8yqUiq15v Qe7g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678295127; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=rcA2ntdi1P93OKb94hYMjJno3exAoB1Jy20Gum/qByI=; b=aSagpt+eQDr8tD51Ifl4GY9kYkjIS2x0FEYiFOUFfNHQphqc3NKrbcZ3AsKvkE/Uif 7cdckamZIhoX5/cnd8q66wfIcssNLcbUukpXPtMM1s+6Hlcqoaon+aAuukgJMWNZlTFg jD0Ql7qTfXbvFABx6BC3x7/GLcZbkKHZ4BqwyWkLTsi9r01pYtTcgIDF7otXKdmKSkWJ ULugpLXHwEKnpBSksw6D+KElOvrahcE4j5IvtXLOUrOMXDCedsgHZOsz2Pa72lDY2h7t uXvybIVoFep0XDiQRILrHANjhED5js2orZyq/U+TCriQpgGLHYo1P2fie2PP1cND/INn dDxg== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKX72qyYYB0TsOVdckjwgMMfCOcVGOx/uliU37vzqrMP2kQMhbNu HjOSugbaLie9aG1uQhA/TZ50RvW5i8WF4g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+y0SaSiQNJeaSyqJoxjtSVlYDr8Q7k01J3awP9LYjGG8h9isw3QtRV2toyxrVArbpZ4/E8Zg== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5c0f:0:b0:3bf:c994:c9ae with SMTP id i15-20020ac85c0f000000b003bfc994c9aemr72307qti.16.1678295126959; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 09:05:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from hurd ([2607:fad8:4:3::1000]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s188-20020a3745c5000000b00742bc037f29sm11597340qka.120.2023.03.08.09.05.23 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 08 Mar 2023 09:05:25 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer To: Simon Tournier Cc: Andreas Enge , =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= , Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , Christopher Baines , guix-devel@gnu.org, 61894@debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@inria.fr> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@cbaines.net> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@envs.net> <861qm0da4y.fsf@gmail.com> <87sfegwh28.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 12:05:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Efraim Flashner's message of "Wed, 8 Mar 2023 11:12:35 +0200") Message-ID: <878rg7uqb4.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::834; envelope-from=maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com; helo=mail-qt1-x834.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 2525022BD7 X-Spam-Score: -7.23 X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -7.23 List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-TUID: AYY4SNQcSUK5 Hi Efraim, Efraim Flashner writes: > On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 01:29:51PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> Simon Tournier writes: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 at 11:36, Andreas Enge wrote: >> > >> >> 1) Every current and potential new package is covered by a team. >> >> 2) Every team has at least 3 members, better yet 4 or 5. >> >> 3 members would make it possible that even if one of them is on vacation >> >> or otherwise busy a patch could be pushed without this additional one >> >> week if the other 2 agree. >> > >> > It would help if being committer implies appearing at least in one team, >> > no? >> > >> > Currently in etc/teams.scm.in, I count 26 members and 20 are committers >> > over the 48 ones. No blame. :-) >> >> If most committers end up being team members, aren't we back to where we >> currently stand? It seems the original motivation here is to add some >> extra control/guards against undesirable commits landing in the core of >> Guix. If a committer that previously landed such commits joined the >> core team (e.g., myself), it seems to me the situation would be little >> changed: > > My understanding was that it would help people feel more ownership over > a portion of the code, allowing others to tag them explicitly for code > review touching their area of expertise and allowing them to perhaps > "pay less attention" to areas where they are less sure. The second part > works better when all areas are covered by a team, but in practice I > feel it was already happening, judging by our large backlog of patches. I believe that's the original rationale behind teams. But the change being discussed here proposes to add a policy to make teams the governing body of changes that touch their area (gating the patches applied), which is something else. That alone sounds like a good idea, assuming teams are healthy and functional. But the aim of the proposed change is to reducing friction between committers, or "pacifying" collaboration, to quote the original message. I don't think such policy will help *much* in that regard, since most of the teams people are the same people as the committers. It'll help some in the sense the group interacting together on merging patches will be smaller, but at the cost of reduced throughput, I reckon. On a side note, it would also introduce some kind of hierarchy in the group, which I dislike. One of the things that make Guix special is that it's pretty flat -- everybody can participate at the same level, at least between committers). I'd rather we don't try to emulate Debian on that point. -- Thanks, Maxim