From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org> Received: from mp1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:58f0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms13.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4IA/D7g5iGd4WgAA62LTzQ:P1 (envelope-from <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>) for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:42:00 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:58f0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4IA/D7g5iGd4WgAA62LTzQ (envelope-from <guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>) for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:42:00 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=mJkFBFDH; 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=1736980920; 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=ZNyepaHz59atZS+/C59wYIb5MhXYCbZvWnYZASfb7Oc=; b=buu+CWii8a0zTM5gRfuKAlQGYRmPfFbqhTJuFtjPwc9zfDSSr9MsdKgO3WEuDvompT6GNQ 6KLBT4joLikNusFoiw3Rv5+oc22J8z8iFsGo8IpWhKRSD/SoplD5XKzGuwlvnAxncMS3eP wcZEnBFgHNWnQZTQA6v5dZDxh7ImHtvACaP2eRHkR9EzE/DzNF/6uok6RQA7gXtZMTdz/f 7PslPxcaCfcxx+N4Rxl71Q6biO/hlg2avi+lGqnwWN5GwMXA65Lt/Y0//6bgofqj/4awWy eYnXEsub3gEd4SjHn0PA9EuVdYnmaC1IhNflKKq3VNlwyn4V8Xo2lPw334j7Pw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=mJkFBFDH; 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-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1736980920; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Cc1PvZrtQinjGM4SzPa2jZc1NqVi/dLa/o2VkdyrxYIV+atEaK6EyVGN15wVpYOVU1q+PD r519Wy+BUxX7Hno14wRzCmc+E3ZJq0z8apOOIQPkwCgO3+M9HeoeMHTgPTEDM3xPU3OuG2 3OOfbWlTgxp3lxG2w9DBF0hsJNR+hChuRAjaxDhBXGoRh01gl+UGosx8/P4hJHU6aNIAIn Mn9syQR0BeFK/9JcalIPHotHA/ODgnxA+RVN9W5UjmM3z+xBLyzFlqrmwhTBixMJweF5j5 ybkJgAyLVOAHcL5qfo2cy6M1MA8bcCvWGzezl0n7cY3JxSpmijPZrEm+yC5wUA== 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 09E394628F for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:42:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org>) id 1tYC4Z-0007on-Ni; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:15 -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 <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>) id 1tYC4Y-0007oP-9l for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:14 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::434]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>) id 1tYC4W-0007CK-KX; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:14 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38a88ba968aso292311f8f.3; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736980870; x=1737585670; darn=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=ZNyepaHz59atZS+/C59wYIb5MhXYCbZvWnYZASfb7Oc=; b=mJkFBFDHeVr6cBHCeEJ5rf/h3HXAA4YIHCf2tf9sxRNGKLmsmtRcJRa9mNFE2o5MjB QfxMs+GSgTbIyPrN3FSY0w0zsdzcb41OMysXFpIFTulx/OSiAcyYugla+NiIbJaYo02+ Ec+0rHKNe/MRXaECKAlfdGPlh1922M3y5N8n6OJAa90EKmJpGF5T7yaTmz3UmFP6RtcS 7KyLLeSLrwBLtyBmhputs0Q0VORdWXfMkQHWgoK5XLT4Y4eCLnOBg8BF6jiR7yyUXURs nxtMW4UbJf0fpKWYWrApLViBaP3mD6ADClPRmby57WTUbonTFo7hXq2XnG3KtPx4m45f 426g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736980870; x=1737585670; 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=ZNyepaHz59atZS+/C59wYIb5MhXYCbZvWnYZASfb7Oc=; b=kAvO28NCG7DatijRQ7ghiLrisFXLaMmZUE6oI78zTZxourz1T+dOJ2gmM4tz8YfyFF kEeeG3FSB67CUIe0lCsHgDeCT0SEUGoTzutLJHCYPO9Eplxg7Yc+CtLgwiBtHqAv42j1 Dls6dzlgu+l41O452shxxdYbulQiWKTqiQitPgVIBHUXwlBTbgpzOOcvx4jNZ6StZrId M82yHzHD6/613vxOQB/A1RJ7x8cp2NcpjUr80L7eK9v+bjUIsVGXHwUm8ebe5i0kgdHM 2tLdOxkUql6OJFre0c4NdFGGZKX5hPodgM1141/B/GTTiRhD7YmyjwZeIiM1sdu6tuFm jANA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU60Srlbgi+xvviX26vAgVagFzcYhReu3EhVADr2dxoGa5Xj7Y4+aUj5uRupkdQdAfSOHyts1UVJg==@gnu.org, AJvYcCVRXQtZgjkkbA8DKurzs7STJfAziXH2DS3qgMmdXd5oBouTN1kbN+5BfTpJzkH9exv5fm2FJg==@gnu.org, AJvYcCXFeJGQIfma+GbZMn+sw0gd4OH+W6hT/mDNxKvkYJK0ZZZYt+rqgidVllZ9QZAsPFFXjeNOKoNjkdqLbBI7kMW21A==@gnu.org, AJvYcCXhgnHqLQm6kdYS4GVOHB+fpp96I3lj4txCjO9QRe6SDnx2idFswj8OfxexB/SXzobB2gIC5Kkb1dJq@gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywh7I0caR3+2fiq5H4QqDV2/n2GqlebLD0gV37SwFovWdL7TXzA 4zkTKN7/VUBKfR2WpF2xdDaqO51l8fPoIL8FK+dA3BuGkwvswo4Xd+8DHQ== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncto2NMa8eylWpfefKk1pkhXxvCTYqx2ATH8zxR8LbUbx/gxJAQzYvFq6mrCKrZ 7/4zpqt236/Dkw1KmjxXFaIH9ZdMFPlLf08oTKn2P9JUyrA1T2yfsjEcu3qAHDxFZoTzDYr5hEQ t/oGvwBcUi3waS3YWQcVfCRf2DppkEe5Dn0sTIMFRGjKkLAIuDN9vLuLk1LZwIjSzMW/iImXQQ8 O6xKlKY9JW0gjjDNJlWY00liBE6dNOqQ7pUEwiGmsKuh3mO6YCFAGhnz2vOKNEQKLqUoFIEvQyJ g0w+aSnWYklUhDk8FKYZkrrof/TwNUcu3WS5a+Lm X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHgd8tJkczp+e4/K2jTk5zchL/1qIx59Y92Fy0JthmcEsv8Col6+cyHnG/GL0lbRIiB5it54A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:186e:b0:385:dc45:ea22 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38a87338d84mr36027467f8f.39.1736980869881; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (2a01cb0411b186000ad1651703251dcf.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb04:11b1:8600:ad1:6517:325:1dcf]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38a8e4b81d7sm18787584f8f.73.2025.01.15.14.41.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:09 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> To: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>, Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> Cc: efraim@flashner.co.il, guix-devel@gnu.org, guix-maintainers@gnu.org, ludo@gnu.org, mail@cbaines.net, rekado@elephly.net, 74736@debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> Subject: Re: Guix Common Document process (v7) (was: Request-For-Comment, RFC) In-Reply-To: <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@gmail.com> <87tta4nk21.fsf@systemreboot.net> <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:32:25 +0100 Message-ID: <87msfr1zeu.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::434; envelope-from=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com; helo=mail-wr1-x434.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." <guix-devel.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>, <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel> List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>, <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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-Migadu-Scanner: mx11.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.01 X-Spam-Score: -4.01 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 09E394628F X-TUID: p0foAwoVG9QH Hi, On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 16:34, Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> wrote: > I like Arun's suggestion of having a separate mailing list for > discussing these important changes (GCD? Greatest common divisors!) > in the future instead of guix-devel. Why do we need a special mailing list? I understand why one does not want to subscribe because the volume might appear to high. Therefore, in this case, I agree that guix-devel is not suitable for announcement. That=E2=80=99s why, I proposed (v7) to use the low traffic info-guix for announcing and asking for inputs. However, I find better to have the discussion happens inside the bug tracker. And easier too; because some contributors when replying break the email thread (incorrect in-reply-to) then it=E2=80=99s very painful to follow. Later, using the bug tracker for discussing, it=E2=80=99s also eas= y to re-read all the comments for one willing to understand why we ended up with such specific GCD. WDYT? > Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including=20 > when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists > on disapproving? Today, how does it happen? Well, I think that better to root the process on what we did over the past 12 years. :-) And for now, we always managed the situation, I guess. ;-) Moreover, it=E2=80=99s bounded by an active participation during the =E2=80= =9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D. Therefore, if one person cannot live with the final state= , it means we failed to find a solution based on what we agree. Somehow, the whole idea with consensus is to be pro-active in resolving locks before they happen, well that=E2=80=99s my understanding. :-) Yes, I agree what happens with examples as: 3/4 support the proposal and 1/4 disagree? Well, it would mean we do not have the consensus. until now we tried to rely on such method for decision making. And it seems to work, no? > The RFC/GCD says: "A team member sending this reply should have made > constructive comments during the discussion period." What if they have > not? They cannot. A deliberating member must be active during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D else this member cannot disapprove. Ot= herwise it would be unfair for all non-deliberating participants. :-) > How about adding a quorum of "disapprove" votes to have effect? Personally, I am more worried with the quorum of 25% that could be difficult to reach than about one =E2=80=9Cdisapprove=E2=80=9D. Well, maybe we could set to 2. But why not 3? Or 4? Or a percentage? Somehow, a quorum defeats the idea of =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D bas= ed on consensus, no? > Notice also that the suggestion bootstraps the team members into a > decision taking body - so far we have added people more or less randomly > to teams. Yes, I agree. Currently, teams members is not really defined. However, it appears to me another work than the current proposal. For instance, we could imagine a GCD that explain the various roles: User, Contributor, Team Member, Committer, Maintainer, etc. Next step? :-) =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 > Or keep the proposal as is and immediately > work on a new GCD to somehow safeguard the addition of people to a team? I am in favor of that: work a new GCD about the various roles. Cheers, simon From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org> Received: from mp0.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 GNx6He05iGfGjAAAqHPOHw:P1 (envelope-from <guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>) for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:42:53 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e16b::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id GNx6He05iGfGjAAAqHPOHw (envelope-from <guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>) for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:42:53 +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=QialyyOG; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=XNa0dV2Q; 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=1736980968; 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=ZNyepaHz59atZS+/C59wYIb5MhXYCbZvWnYZASfb7Oc=; b=Kb/mL500vi4jEnbqQLJxVqbuLMOwm1kqVGlM9Lf84REPStJfhPzhPmOZGc4DwidNpK/Q7Y tQ0EX/+XXXQl0IwJq9nLccdSWM8g+021TkuuVdXOerzviDKPkGzeac8NMG1p5NniypvVcD e9y8YOFv0rdX0dJq0Zi6MjXLDYoBaV32iw28LJN+wW0dV8JQL6V0cb4xO5rz7QEXzzrf6/ O7d0Tr46l/EmnoXsAjpA37rnmFjMGGdHNBc9Ilj5R273i4mlB5PCWosTst97XFddw6kSyj 1l54mWdMkVU1H7bgg4qAwwTyUyVjQEkVyuWBVxunjZxStDkN3LAUHWi7K3xmHg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=debbugs.gnu.org header.s=debbugs-gnu-org header.b=QialyyOG; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=XNa0dV2Q; 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=1736980968; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=NLCcsZEzsa4u/+OgcHQUAWeMsM+inZbL64J7XwWbfBzXDGCv/6LeUkd1/rg5xMMR+KFo9c vUlt89zO0jfoAh4eNlVXHSnNEQJTRbu+RtAOn5QHt5FMtGSf5jjbRxyFaWsyPipdo0uxRk DFAg5ZcGpRGuWV9vXYzc7/aML8iqTgZAehqMX9BclJJjNXf5DeqBEog3YldsIvYpwGEmFL mRRsydmLvZ2XzpYpdgqE78CGYr52X/GcQOrbweUcowjXHjnpFS3krPIG4/PFBvP1YmsHqd PXELEsvm0roM3gkc+VwXy/ROO3zAFYnOtmkKwoOrgtDYtMoAhHkh1eG8VC8SmQ== 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 284E079B92 for <larch@yhetil.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:42:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org>) id 1tYC5x-0000Bm-Nj; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:42:42 -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 <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYC5M-0008Ts-8Y for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:42:07 -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 <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYC5L-0007GW-PQ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:42:04 -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=ZNyepaHz59atZS+/C59wYIb5MhXYCbZvWnYZASfb7Oc=; b=QialyyOG3CZQoKiBTjp4bt5tSFJ3mjsv32R3qEap67NbJy6TwHYziEoRosOEfCaplkeZqf7RDEw2sfxDK973pq7fl+o0qrbkLWo6vH6H5GGzT+o0L4viX1hfl3rh7JAkYebexRv+XEFoOTYxoPRXoEoOaQ2YHUBDfjbuMC7BiI9ZadsjnvwOlK5tFaRPGAX9xP5QpmiH03oDHSw01tVGrIy6mkTlE1ZidQvsspxRmTgxNNmzX/coIUnTHFN0tI1YuweVAhEUQLF3sn3m3rmtyem/Amlk2JUaCl0xxkE8jKicSZaUlJZY3iUV2TsaQ1l88407RmBW/8ytdUFaONyxJw==; Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYC5L-0004Bc-Kf for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:42:03 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#74736] Guix Common Document process (v7) (was: Request-For-Comment, RFC) Resent-From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org> Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:42:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: <handler.74736.B74736.173698090816040@debbugs.gnu.org> Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 74736 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>, Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net> Cc: guix-maintainers@gnu.org, ludo@gnu.org, mail@cbaines.net, efraim@flashner.co.il, rekado@elephly.net, guix-devel@gnu.org, 74736@debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> Received: via spool by 74736-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B74736.173698090816040 (code B ref 74736); Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:42:03 +0000 Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jan 2025 22:41:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59162 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYC55-0004Ac-C9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:47 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x429.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::429]:52298) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>) id 1tYC4a-00048Z-4v for 74736@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:17 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-x429.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3862ca8e0bbso244714f8f.0 for <74736@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736980870; x=1737585670; 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=ZNyepaHz59atZS+/C59wYIb5MhXYCbZvWnYZASfb7Oc=; b=XNa0dV2Q3Bjl3LNYBU90KuC04UvCLufE44x6E5o9Pj2V5ypQOhAufSGs8RXGStGRv4 2g3phxtLHV6DAd0Zt0yUBge2piKwMmmlhS18ux2HcRBd3zmNcBE9Af2sZwFlJtxu3ySe r7IDHW3XRyBNC0fLztwbQgf6oLkG/K2/ic0FC4Nn4vUr1egM5rHU4Gbx/JrodhbdwLgF ig3M/lTQ9Pu0h+G2PJHS0wEILMlbdWUope19xLdOdnl9RkmaTjh7r1FvXondvaveLr5R N7vWpA2hVxoGxdhmUcVCTV8Y2YOwh6P4C1eoUHBkNM9cDLoFPA4auNyviAL/i0HSwp3N GvgA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736980870; x=1737585670; 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=ZNyepaHz59atZS+/C59wYIb5MhXYCbZvWnYZASfb7Oc=; b=La76S8KKaWLmypFoO4bEwKTR/dYfGPUAnJT/Iq9IK10qxi2n2xfpTudA/QnD/QlgYX HxFQbus9RpjGvhpKXnLOw2O/jXZR80uFUZINUFgO5SjOkRg0Ff5GzlFJvIB/q/up7zft KNgGegtSf5Q4O5kokCwkI/V4t0QjQU6bB/YyeSCn/1IXkWStvPv3Fum4tYJ6nEHhjJ3X k6m+E3usWfKjb4rdXI4j5rpbcSAjjBC8L9+VC/rtjZ8kcyliBKLtrxcZuzNjJp7kFM7R PIcCHPCmy23FE4PnsR+3ttxMwWn+eOPeq9y4AEBREIdsHaJSw+AxWELkXvjLTg2NlUbN CqBA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVUkORYd3PI9I3ALQnSYut9KvGPFk15Y/knSDc4nh8c6VAK03ML8axt45O6KYUwx7zXgCTsIg==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxVzRHomTVkoQ7F6L3kLKXn945FDKxDdo+qv4eJSdTXnB7fZ1Y8 SVrYSflXszmTeAw7qIzrqzTbUl+0h7umr0+PnX8lvfkYyC0M+bpk X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctjzDK8cHK5av5luYG1aXhN07j8jzkjfiDKjd92RauZWgEyPh2MuxTAYefSXGQ 0WDpc+LDfMzd/NnMz3Sa0F4aDzzPW7yBv6TJIYwBa+0iwY+ySteYqQTmme6q1ftrAKIspq9kEyP Vps2pCH8LPPKc1AMnWIl1R9npUCl5MV6wa6e0ELZ+yIwWNNo0gS5uuNgSCOo/2tHhLAAN7rAwfv Pdope/ML8SsooMpVkR48pqFvDM4Yjl70SoLu6hb1MkMAspaDofjrofKJFs4UaXdlUpu1tmZ8gX7 R0Mna0HrRGMa3ENAUU0nUQ7r3doelcVcvfF9iC7e X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHgd8tJkczp+e4/K2jTk5zchL/1qIx59Y92Fy0JthmcEsv8Col6+cyHnG/GL0lbRIiB5it54A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:186e:b0:385:dc45:ea22 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38a87338d84mr36027467f8f.39.1736980869881; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (2a01cb0411b186000ad1651703251dcf.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb04:11b1:8600:ad1:6517:325:1dcf]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38a8e4b81d7sm18787584f8f.73.2025.01.15.14.41.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:09 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@gmail.com> <87tta4nk21.fsf@systemreboot.net> <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:32:25 +0100 Message-ID: <87msfr1zeu.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: <guix-patches.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>, <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches> List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>, <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=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: 284E079B92 X-Migadu-Scanner: mx13.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: 0.96 X-Spam-Score: 0.96 X-TUID: lACMtp6uipdL Message-ID: <20250115223225.j_2yTHsecMei2mMVODNiy-_SZLDaKEx7GvupVnHlacU@z> Hi, On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 16:34, Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> wrote: > I like Arun's suggestion of having a separate mailing list for > discussing these important changes (GCD? Greatest common divisors!) > in the future instead of guix-devel. Why do we need a special mailing list? I understand why one does not want to subscribe because the volume might appear to high. Therefore, in this case, I agree that guix-devel is not suitable for announcement. That=E2=80=99s why, I proposed (v7) to use the low traffic info-guix for announcing and asking for inputs. However, I find better to have the discussion happens inside the bug tracker. And easier too; because some contributors when replying break the email thread (incorrect in-reply-to) then it=E2=80=99s very painful to follow. Later, using the bug tracker for discussing, it=E2=80=99s also eas= y to re-read all the comments for one willing to understand why we ended up with such specific GCD. WDYT? > Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including=20 > when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists > on disapproving? Today, how does it happen? Well, I think that better to root the process on what we did over the past 12 years. :-) And for now, we always managed the situation, I guess. ;-) Moreover, it=E2=80=99s bounded by an active participation during the =E2=80= =9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D. Therefore, if one person cannot live with the final state= , it means we failed to find a solution based on what we agree. Somehow, the whole idea with consensus is to be pro-active in resolving locks before they happen, well that=E2=80=99s my understanding. :-) Yes, I agree what happens with examples as: 3/4 support the proposal and 1/4 disagree? Well, it would mean we do not have the consensus. until now we tried to rely on such method for decision making. And it seems to work, no? > The RFC/GCD says: "A team member sending this reply should have made > constructive comments during the discussion period." What if they have > not? They cannot. A deliberating member must be active during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D else this member cannot disapprove. Ot= herwise it would be unfair for all non-deliberating participants. :-) > How about adding a quorum of "disapprove" votes to have effect? Personally, I am more worried with the quorum of 25% that could be difficult to reach than about one =E2=80=9Cdisapprove=E2=80=9D. Well, maybe we could set to 2. But why not 3? Or 4? Or a percentage? Somehow, a quorum defeats the idea of =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D bas= ed on consensus, no? > Notice also that the suggestion bootstraps the team members into a > decision taking body - so far we have added people more or less randomly > to teams. Yes, I agree. Currently, teams members is not really defined. However, it appears to me another work than the current proposal. For instance, we could imagine a GCD that explain the various roles: User, Contributor, Team Member, Committer, Maintainer, etc. Next step? :-) =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 > Or keep the proposal as is and immediately > work on a new GCD to somehow safeguard the addition of people to a team? I am in favor of that: work a new GCD about the various roles. Cheers, simon