From: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
To: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com>
Cc: 74736@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:17:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@crazy-compilers.com> (Hartmut Goebel's message of "Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:57:51 +0100")
Hi Hartmut,
Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com> skribis:
> being late to the discussion, here are my 2 cent. Please apologize if things have already been discussion and decided.
No worries, we still have a bit of time to discuss, thanks for chiming in!
I agree with most of your suggestions/comments. I’ll just comment where
deserved:
> Section "How the Process Works", number 3: I don't understand "must not be prospective". According to dict.leo.org, "prospective"
> translates in German to adjectives like long-sighted put also to in the future, estimated, likley.
This is meant to suggest (I believe) that the process is not meant as a
way to brainstorm new ideas; instead, it should be applied to ideas that
we roughly know how to implement.
> Section "Roles", Sponsor: "is a contributor" and "should be a contributor". Contributor to the GCD or to Guix? What makes one a
> "contributor"? Is the term defined somewhere else, e.g. in the Guix Manual?
It’s not defined; we can add it to “Roles”.
> Section "Submission Period", Withdrawal and Resubmit: Are there any rules why or when an author may resubmit the GCD? Is feedback
> like "The idea is good, but a lot of things popped up during discussion, so we need revise the GCD in great parts" a case for this?
It’s up to authors to decide what to do based on the feedback they got
(or lack thereof). If nobody was willing to sponsor it, then perhaps
it’s a sign that people either disapprove it or are uninterested in it
in its current form.
> Section "Discussion Period": Can the period be extended? What happens if there is still heavy discussion aber 60 days?
It has to be at most 60 days, I think that’s quite clear.
> Section "Deliberate period": IMHO "deliberation" is the wrong term, since the team members send in their votes. I suggest calling it "Voting
> Period", even if someone might argue that in consent based decision making, "deliberation" is the term to use.
I proposed “Voting Period” but we eventually considered that
“Deliberation Period” would better represent what this is.
> Section "Deliberate period":The 25% are to be counted at which valuation date? I propose:
You propose what? :-)
Thanks,
Ludo’.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-13 21:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-08 12:29 [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2024-12-08 12:31 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 1/1] rfc: " Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2024-12-12 18:14 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] " Ludovic Courtès
2024-12-12 19:47 ` Simon Tournier
2024-12-14 10:06 ` Ludovic Courtès
2024-12-23 17:58 ` Simon Tournier
2024-12-26 11:15 ` Ludovic Courtès
2024-12-09 20:47 ` Artyom V. Poptsov
2024-12-12 19:30 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v3] rfc: " Simon Tournier
2024-12-14 10:47 ` Ludovic Courtès
2024-12-22 13:06 ` Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2024-12-22 13:56 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v4 0/1] " Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2024-12-22 13:56 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v4 1/1] " Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2024-12-23 14:42 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] " Ludovic Courtès
2024-12-23 17:33 ` Simon Tournier
2024-12-26 11:28 ` Ludovic Courtès
2024-12-31 15:23 ` Simon Tournier
2024-12-29 18:31 ` Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2024-12-30 11:03 ` Ludovic Courtès
2024-12-30 11:58 ` Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2025-01-04 17:28 ` Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-05 12:51 ` Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2025-01-06 10:29 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-06 17:40 ` Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-08 10:53 ` Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-09 13:27 ` Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-09 22:48 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-10 10:39 ` Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2025-01-10 13:02 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-10 16:48 ` Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2025-01-11 0:47 ` Suhail Singh
2025-01-15 18:44 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-03 18:14 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v5] rfc: " Simon Tournier
2025-01-06 22:29 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-07 17:06 ` Noé Lopez via Guix-patches via
2025-01-08 15:12 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process Suhail Singh
2025-01-09 17:21 ` Simon Tournier
[not found] ` <825F8319-4F41-4F4C-81B3-2C84A73A13CF@housseini.me>
2025-01-08 6:33 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process reza via Guix-patches via
2025-01-09 23:22 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-08 16:26 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process pukkamustard
2025-01-09 17:18 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-09 21:00 ` Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-09 21:16 ` Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-09 16:21 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process Simon Tournier
2025-01-09 22:32 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-09 23:56 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-10 0:40 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process Vagrant Cascadian
2025-01-10 12:25 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-13 1:45 ` Vagrant Cascadian
2025-01-15 18:58 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-10 7:44 ` Janneke Nieuwenhuizen
2025-01-10 12:45 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-10 13:17 ` Janneke Nieuwenhuizen
2025-01-15 19:12 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-07 19:40 ` [bug#74736] Add Request-For-Comment process Ricardo Wurmus
2025-01-09 23:45 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v7] Add Guix Common Document process Simon Tournier
2025-01-10 17:15 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v8] Add Request-For-Comment process Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-15 22:40 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-16 9:00 ` Ludovic Courtès
2025-01-16 9:50 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-12 15:57 ` [bug#74736] Re v8 of " Hartmut Goebel
2025-01-13 21:17 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2025-01-16 19:43 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] " Hartmut Goebel
2025-01-16 20:41 ` Hartmut Goebel
2025-01-16 23:51 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-16 23:50 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-16 17:43 ` [bug#74736] Re v8 of " Simon Tournier
2025-01-16 19:50 ` Hartmut Goebel
2025-01-17 0:20 ` Simon Tournier
2025-01-16 17:55 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v9] Add Guix Consensus Document process Simon Tournier
2025-01-16 23:13 ` [bug#74736] Do you read it? (was: [bug#74736] [PATCH v9] Add Guix Consensus Document process) Simon Tournier
2025-01-17 0:43 ` [bug#74736] [PATCH v10] Add Guix Consensus Document process Simon Tournier
2025-01-17 0:53 ` Simon Tournier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=74736@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.