From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp10.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms9.migadu.com with LMTPS id oGylFpbtEWTElgAASxT56A (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 17:08:54 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp10.migadu.com with LMTPS id IM66FZbtEWRUDgEAG6o9tA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 17:08:54 +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 DCBFA8C7B for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 17:08:53 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gnu.org header.s=fencepost-gnu-org header.b=dcCko2qD; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; 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" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1678896534; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=qI3B1GAl6iyMW1JMdnWdET0d1WIaX2sH0qvIbYkjF50=; b=fHwKqEp3AlXtVkryRq6rmM12X2cqK4ok7J3TJhnfyJq0V56umr6jxfquseDdeMs5o/zK5h F9UioGj8hH8qhKl+N8PYVqyD3L5pxnxmRxYQFiKh2x7UNQBvJDv0Cd9YSjkyxkUuEmWq8b UloYKZB4HCEhlYQvAHzv/1KfMpwJ9WkVabrr8O5MVyPymz6DdJOJH4furvIggu/j6EDCwc XmpxDQXosU4mTDta1F5nInT7SbnczbW4v1RAU/hQKnAVVM+r01Mv9eeXIDVDNm0cEaSAUB iS8pYZbFlrM766U1wNTz2hxQmEeOwDedAiVKznsgtAEPP/GVRmYiouM6/7m7mw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gnu.org header.s=fencepost-gnu-org header.b=dcCko2qD; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; 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" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1678896534; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=hnkzSUBpIs/wD03oZljHvHFJhJ9Uaw41z7iQTqx8YLrfVbHyf+TOHnvcezg5LQF0Bjulb+ BgmLl1AxULYbkOXN395CJtcbfh1zwMOgkBIvM/EaRtEMPGirveDR1qUKOXvKSUYVPbZXYT Yw+MtD2JKBtuTVfFK5SH75LuEgRe2Ge8ZupzI2syeEuN+ydh8UtlJZw1Jo7F0u9bLGc9ZZ /4N2j2pQmTbhY3CoQwhFn41hIOvMHXc7CZVzkMMxKpTMxy3fw5+TzXm4HtXH0Q8plikfXo KWMqWUq3TYkQfi9GsN0PHKqgdxhAwpgFJvbZym7GKj3xOZPpPMBcuscP8M8J4A== Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pcTg3-0007ka-VR; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 12:08:36 -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 1pcTfx-0007cY-NR for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 12:08:30 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pcTfu-0001Ks-U5; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 12:08:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=qI3B1GAl6iyMW1JMdnWdET0d1WIaX2sH0qvIbYkjF50=; b=dcCko2qDk/5hD/VRbanD NxX5ijzrOITrw5PN10Gxym1JJ3ZcCY8OzkOACTged9c+Uqeai8PXyeEbEILS1h02scXqN6vwKSBEt oLKDOWlet62WLgPEkkdVqizZr1hDSHrnxeHfvzBMkYpmefE1aM4FrGqp2+wrrNRqpSBwxCsPKTTjh VgJusLf4Gf1s5zOoUrJwzSSg7qU1d3v/bRwUaTNT9yC5k2qX/McErwRMAl6sRtRsnbaa6T/ANZ78O +HvT3KKG5IfvH6sJ/C085r601D6hNRP2eeUjjiSdXOIPHuEvklQCqC1pOrwhmPHXUMV0PSQsJduey QqM5oA1zzeHuIg==; Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net ([91.160.117.201] helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pcTfu-0001ZG-Gv; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 12:08:26 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Maxim Cournoyer Cc: Simon Tournier , Andreas Enge , =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= , 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> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@gmail.com> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@gmail.com> <874jqtte7c.fsf@gmail.com> <87bkl0frnk.fsf@gnu.org> <87356ar6p1.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Quintidi 25 =?utf-8?Q?Vent=C3=B4se?= an 231 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour du Thon X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 17:08:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87356ar6p1.fsf@gmail.com> (Maxim Cournoyer's message of "Sat, 11 Mar 2023 22:26:18 -0500") Message-ID: <87bkku2e14.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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-Queue-Id: DCBFA8C7B X-Spam-Score: -8.06 X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -8.06 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com 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-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-TUID: r0Pf5DOD0Snj Hello! Maxim Cournoyer skribis: [...] >> =E2=80=9CPacify=E2=80=9D in the sense that, by being explicit, we avoid >> misunderstandings that could turn into unpleasant experiences. >> >> Like you I=E2=80=99m glad collaboration is nice and friendly; yet, over = the past >> few months I=E2=80=99ve experienced misunderstandings that seemingly bro= ke the >> consensus-based process that has always prevailed. > > I'm sorry that you feel that way. I don't think consensus was willfully > broken, That=E2=80=99s my point: by being explicit about approval, we would avoid s= uch misunderstandings. > and perhaps by studying some actual examples of these occurrences we > can better understand what went wrong and how the new suggested policy > would have helped or could be modified to help avoid such problems in > the future. I don=E2=80=99t want to rehash past occurrences of this problem. It boils = down to: changes where pushed despite consensus evidently not being met, at least not in the mind of every involved party. To some extent, that=E2=80=99s bound to happen due to an increase of the nu= mber of contributors, scope of the project, and diversity of backgrounds. By making it clear that lack of =E2=80=9CLGTM=E2=80=9D from another team membe= r equates with lack of consensus, we would avoid those misunderstandings. A good reference on consensus-based decision making is . > It's also worth noting that this consensus-based process has always > been implicit; for example, it is not defined/mentioned anywhere in > our documentation. Perhaps it should? Those who=E2=80=99ve followed the project long enough, such as part of the current maintainer collective, are certainly aware of that; it=E2=80=99s al= so spelled out in . That said, again in the spirit of improving legibility, writing it down would be much welcome. >> In a way, that=E2=80=99s probably bound to happen as the group grows, an= d I >> think that=E2=80=99s why we must be explicit about what the process is a= nd about >> whether one is expressing consent or dissent. >> >> With so many things happening in Guix (yay!), it=E2=80=99s also easy to = overlook >> a change and realize when it=E2=80=99s too late. By having a rule that = at least >> one other person on the team must approve (consent to) a change, we >> reduce that risk. >> >> Being on a team, then, is a way to express interest on a topic and to be >> =E2=80=9Cin the loop=E2=80=9D. > > That's already what teams can do! Yes and no. With the amount of activity going on, it=E2=80=99s easy to ove= rlook something. The explicit synchronization point could mitigate that. > I'd argue giving them the extra powers that would be conferred to > teams in this is not needed/desirable. Some committer not a regular > member of X team may still be confident enough to push a patch sitting > on the tracker, and I think they should be able to. Self-assessment becomes tricky that this scale; I might be confident and yet someone will point out a problem (that literally happened to me two days ago in ). That=E2=80=99s when revi= ew really helps. For =E2=80=9Ccore=E2=80=9D work, I insist that explicit approval (and thus = peer review) is necessary. I doubt anyone would seriously challenge that. Now, I agree, as I wrote before, that this may be overkill for =E2=80=9Cran= dom packages=E2=80=9D. Thus we need to find the right balance. What about team/scope-specific rules? As in: =E2=80=9CChanges covered by t= eams X, Y, and Z need to be explicitly approved by at least one other member of the team.=E2=80=9D >> It is not about asserting power or building a hierarchy; >> it=E2=80=99s about formalizing existing relations and processes. > > OK; I think in practice it would amount to that though (building a > hierarchy which has some form power). I disagree: just because power relations are not spelled out doesn=E2=80=99t mean they don=E2=80=99t exist. I don=E2=80=99t know where you=E2=80=99re t= alking from; one thing that to me shed light on these matters is =E2=80=9CThe Tyranny of Structurelessness=E2=80=9D (I=E2=80=99m sure I mentioned it before, I certa= inly did during Q&A on this very topic at the Ten Years event; apologies if I sound like a broken record!). Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.