Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Mar 2023 11:15:05 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Mar 12 07:15:05 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59314 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1pbJfN-0008W5-5m
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 07:15:05 -0400
Received: from mail-wr1-f53.google.com ([209.85.221.53]:41963)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1pbJfK-0008Ub-CN
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 07:15:03 -0400
Received: by mail-wr1-f53.google.com with SMTP id f11so8834862wrv.8
for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 12 Mar 2023 04:15:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678619696;
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=bcd9ydmVXXBzGsyu7De1lvneY/l3r0XF6kjZyTdj+NQ=;
b=iGHCiRZdQT9pxe7/LPKoUhoETtQoGX1/iWNy6o/Sl3sFdZTZxtL1NGUagIysSM8N4f
LGazYdKMirRpvevZp4iIFfm5uvd3uLeYFjHXc/zzJkz68cdUVcR+8K+gsVVlZg0LLq0s
Ptyi7YK3tMrdFyyVbBSKWa1gNq0UxerI8xsvJL3sJ980Orpq14sSjwWmc+OeE35tVqE7
wxbHnHJAdqZ/S9cZBplAOmW35bfZHEx47HrWnS5hI7JhSaFQI5xKO+ECM4ZBnXU1dCyF
XsuI7Qu20Lb6zffiswva4sgdGcTBN8M1ER+2bx70tIMxwHGrbpaptS5JKJLtn7XYWu5p
dW0Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678619696;
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=bcd9ydmVXXBzGsyu7De1lvneY/l3r0XF6kjZyTdj+NQ=;
b=1gTsHCOv9/Rr2dJ50oJbL3Itv2GB/1HdiuJfgLymIA0R3/pqt9Aoco5uOptg0GIisv
nfBiNksXaDQlhf5jqEf3yJzk6fuUU+fXKFtJhxc0Y4juUnmK0qAjGaeJ1Gqtcnk1i133
bBwlTLkzIYrhFl37F9QeVPI+8As1WSB0zXTh8srX3XLHIMRfDWdIkQXCzYONQ9+bsiQZ
Z5ldH+5yhvBSyznqgiJk45xFjh1H02OUbeXsS1T7Ag1c+PHWUcodEocFCGm7BQmUKgAD
OSvC6Rk2GYSG0wkOKUlh/lXegeOvA1dORQZcs35xL8TUdQEVhWp41PPC+bZkh9G2FoEY
niQQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUh3IyeiU9fSN+gC+nbnqa9hM1OynjTcF5jqgITTAt0sYKfjnpP
s/PpmJI3fDtILKOXgMo0Lxs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+yhiVQI5RYtuAkllMMQuBP0wwuU7g5R537srf/bhK+zbDBlxR+6V3UhY82LeGoJvAzp2PZtA==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:ec11:0:b0:2ce:a773:1150 with SMTP id
x17-20020adfec11000000b002cea7731150mr2388558wrn.6.1678619696088;
Sun, 12 Mar 2023 04:14:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:65d2:2476:f637:db1e])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
w12-20020a5d680c000000b002c5526234d2sm4762594wru.8.2023.03.12.04.14.54
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Sun, 12 Mar 2023 04:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Felix Lechner
<felix.lechner@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
In-Reply-To: <878rg2r95i.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT>
<878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN>
<874jqtte7c.fsf@HIDDEN> <87bkl0frnk.fsf@HIDDEN>
<CAFHYt565J8w1Rr59cW85xCBCA6nq+_0rA9z-UHtaSATfgdRnWg@HIDDEN>
<878rg2r95i.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2023 12:14:52 +0100
Message-ID: <86bkky9q6r.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
=?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
guix-devel@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi,
On Sat, 11 Mar 2023 at 21:33, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> w=
rote:
> It may help to shed a bit of light on the original reason I think this
> change came into existence, and in the interest of transparency and
> hopefully improving or finding alternatives to the proposed change, I
> consent to Ludovic openly discussing it, even if it involves a healthy
> dose of critique and looking inward.
There is no one original reason but several diffuse situations. Well, I
have tried to provide the context and the intent behind the patch in
this message here:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-03/msg00121.html
Although I agree that the wording of the initial Ludo=E2=80=99s proposal is=
not
the one I would like, it does not appear to me so crazy to ask another
LGTM for some part of the code.
Double-check leaf Python package is not worth and it adds a lot of
unnecessary burden. We all agree here, I guess.
Double-check core packages or Guile build-side code sounds to me totally
reasonable.
The initial wording of the proposal,
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
+When your patch falls under the area of expertise of a team
+(@pxref{Teams}), you need the explicit approval of at least one team
+member before committing (another team member if you are on the team).
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
cannot apply for all the teams. Again, we all agree I guess.
However, this proposal appears to me totally sane for what is under the
scope of the team named =E2=80=99core=E2=80=99 for instance.
Instead of a strong opposition, the patch needs an update.
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Mar 2023 03:26:29 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Mar 11 22:26:28 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58885 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1pbCLs-0000yp-Eb
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 22:26:28 -0500
Received: from mail-qt1-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:36694)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1pbCLq-0000yd-6j
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 22:26:26 -0500
Received: by mail-qt1-f174.google.com with SMTP id l13so10051985qtv.3
for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 19:26:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678591580;
h=content-transfer-encoding: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=DAcPYX5CATUKt9V9jEalrE5VReRFI9rRd3Sxpis4RKM=;
b=l3oRlD/X6QPA+cQB1/aa0MxSs6/+m7BLKMzQgMcoRkezGmjKsbD4kICMymYduB4Rni
xEQGf+YD22RzDRcAoKmufEi5rOqo21A/R0lE/AacwHWv+/Jubh+suL7MFMGknq2+Oisc
Dxc26ApKW/CwBaFyYYOPnNO4kUf9DwbGc00wo3uD/8l/rJWFROdDyG+LVeyaLztMbhWk
HV7NHtbkLQBt+LBmnUKKncsCzRVU8WJXzGXY1Mwcvc9Sa9IicMtHv37fSi54ny75ow+Y
dopCIKPUOZYspZ/2iprplT5YFt/lvP7+EQGwkG7Dty5Xoimd/ZgpxkweEJ3I4AcOn4N0
MSFw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678591580;
h=content-transfer-encoding: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=DAcPYX5CATUKt9V9jEalrE5VReRFI9rRd3Sxpis4RKM=;
b=tovDo8luLbCBdhmEbSSyG2MQrEnkZr/KMbJgUG59mM5wsq2q6nts2OI0AXHyJErM8b
taxC0ZzvZutZmYgojZCe2LqwVHJxfKfHlCM0xa9E/PQiRWQH2v+l8jZJSWMiHnRD9mAW
smkW++OF/G5NxSoKDCA7A8WKfEhaRWlqyvPhRXE/Yv4js6qqzMVaLSQ8rjYfxXcE/dFG
jL/b5vT37q3aPgXGQTNB67/vAr7+McBDo8jxRwu8ILpGGZSdzqAErOFlBwwQdfOUtLbm
v26G5AnN5PJyz/E4JtQBMWIgJUSwPDQnOoWSYSlGf3iCef1IQq7356rIEFrRrEejZvCu
48SA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKU5Sbg7K1abxtDn/GgpmqERlIFvUKyH499mxddvHEXQM26OnRw9
OLOkA5vFNw7ASCnfCbrDdFs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8fYiUbBEq90BtzSoLCWD03G+XHLFI8IHP52S2uNKyRyALc0R5fqRfuqk1yb4eAWwilbfhNGg==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7f16:0:b0:3bf:d0b1:433d with SMTP id
f22-20020ac87f16000000b003bfd0b1433dmr55728678qtk.60.1678591580602;
Sat, 11 Mar 2023 19:26:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hurd ([2607:fad8:4:3::1000]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
l24-20020ac848d8000000b003b9b8ec742csm2929224qtr.14.2023.03.11.19.26.19
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Sat, 11 Mar 2023 19:26:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT>
<878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN>
<874jqtte7c.fsf@HIDDEN> <87bkl0frnk.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2023 22:26:18 -0500
In-Reply-To: <87bkl0frnk.fsf@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?=
=?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:22:07 +0100")
Message-ID: <87356ar6p1.fsf@HIDDEN>
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-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
=?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
guix-devel@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi Ludovic,
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes:
> Hello Maxim and all!
>
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> skribis:
>
>>> With the proposed policy, members of a team would also have to review
>>> and approve each other=E2=80=99s work. Formal approval means getting an
>>> explicit =E2=80=9CLGTM=E2=80=9D (or similar) from at least one other te=
am member.
>>
>> In other words, to give teams the power to gate the changes touching
>> their scope. That's reasonable, if we have functional teams. I'd argue
>> we aren't there yet.
>
> I kinda agree; bootstrapping issue then?
Bootstrapping, yes, but also tooling, and people not yet catching up.
As I've pointed before, we've had the doc mentioning a command which
doesn't work to notify teams since at least October of last year [0] and
it seems few people even noticed (I think you only did recently :-)),
which tells me it's not a very well-trodden path yet!
[0] https://issues.guix.gnu.org/58813
> I hope the maintainer team can help make teams =E2=80=9Cmore functional=
=E2=80=9D,
> whatever that teams. It=E2=80=99s really what maintainership is about in=
Guix;
> it=E2=80=99s not about writing code.
I'm happy to help with the effort, but I don't think it's particularly
relevant to Guix co-maintainers more than anyone else interested in
advancing/contributing to Guix, and I find it great that it's this way
(not out of laziness, but because the talent pool of the whole Guix
community is much larger that that of us 4 co-maintainers). Per what we
co-maintainers signed up for in [1], the co-maintainers three primary
duties are:
Enforcing GNU and Guix policies, such as the project=E2=80=99s commitme=
nt to
be released under a copyleft free software license (GPLv3+) and to
follow the Free System Distribution Guideline (FSDG).
Enforcing our code of conduct: maintainers are the contact point for
anyone who wants to report abuse.
Making decisions, about code or anything, when consensus cannot be
reached. We=E2=80=99ve probably never encountered such a situation befo=
re,
though!
[1] https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2019/gnu-guix-maintainer-collective-expan=
ds/
>> And also:
>>> I think it avoids the unavoidable misunderstandings that can arise in
>>> a growing group and help pacify day-to-day collaboration.
>>
>> Again, "pacify" irks me a bit in this sentence, given I consider
>> collaboration has and continues to be cordial in our community, unless
>> I've been living under a rock.
>
> =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 t=
he past
> few months I=E2=80=99ve experienced misunderstandings that seemingly brok=
e the
> consensus-based process that has always prevailed.
I'm sorry that you feel that way. I don't think consensus was willfully
broken, 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. 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?
> In a way, that=E2=80=99s probably bound to happen as the group grows, and=
I
> think that=E2=80=99s why we must be explicit about what the process is an=
d about
> whether one is expressing consent or dissent.
>
> With so many things happening in Guix (yay!), it=E2=80=99s also easy to o=
verlook
> a change and realize when it=E2=80=99s too late. By having a rule that a=
t 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! 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.
> 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 hope this clarifies my position!
Yes, it does. Thanks for taking the time to field some of the
questions!
--=20
Thanks,
Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Mar 2023 02:33:23 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Mar 11 21:33:23 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58872 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pbBWV-00087y-FR for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 21:33:23 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-f179.google.com ([209.85.160.179]:35476) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1pbBWT-00087j-Au for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 21:33:22 -0500 Received: by mail-qt1-f179.google.com with SMTP id y10so10003956qtj.2 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 18:33:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678588396; h=content-transfer-encoding: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=zTVd98HIApp2kigN9WFg9U2mAT8RPbD/DXB3VDaRnOs=; b=IVzxMC0XgN3H0kECmaLjVi+fZGDpSXnU97sOma+GPMQEEAPT9X6k2XPdCU5IYvPwqg FR2Z2b2UYc+Feal1818liLicVN9Mkr1sKMeKVnW13qkAdLhX0fubuCKTeLMaatrlXchh +isDy92iWssP3oPaAw2DNC1JAy2hFrXSO69aKAaQbRH6PveV4gYzfN0Sk0Qx3GjvRr+b IU4G7mhCBY8s0vRRWs61I+SRi4/BGckSF6zDkrnYVtoIE0vP6Cnlr6TUavVbCQ7nJzV9 zGuept4/qvqj0bqj0KePbi5OeQ1lJU6nLVmIsEi4qc6SjEH6AYSo6b+2vvBdKZvkFeyP rpiA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678588396; h=content-transfer-encoding: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=zTVd98HIApp2kigN9WFg9U2mAT8RPbD/DXB3VDaRnOs=; b=Bi90zjpP9kHgXY5U9sJ1UgBLykT+Hx3m1okq3cE7rnco4Yxa2ZYM5DR44+xhSQYBhw cUALja5N94E5atlhGYHjuvgK4quHJWnx8ZB0BWiBCNsxcie6COau3If0JNbgtG8RZOzS tO16jDvY3eg7RNeZLRokMG7sD8ca93gH9k8PGkVyQCF03tNOybGGp07ZJ501MpLBkVgB RgV0ZUPz89tLTqwLf5uL/sqxzxKukBVxojFKtVwkvqib+YvX7eP/noL/SaXQ5c4zAAMz tNWBK03Ig7iNtWMZALEl73IHHS/BEx6rlm/9HK2W8m9jq/Ttsvt+cCBF/h+l6tK8Zxfl CIJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKVszhrSAElON/QE7KJYIvBlkJn4mMosjBV27KW3Lm+FKEQwsWNF y6jy/XPDCRYC0NqZW1DN0E0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+TQYROO2jofZ8oSDABc6mHisFGz/8l3vC4YZJaqFrLAPu/C9NAAS6cp1/tb8BDiI93WteOBQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:118b:b0:3bf:d1ba:daec with SMTP id m11-20020a05622a118b00b003bfd1badaecmr49171680qtk.16.1678588395852; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 18:33:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from hurd ([2607:fad8:4:3::1000]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l6-20020a37f906000000b0073b3316bbd0sm2791620qkj.29.2023.03.11.18.33.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 11 Mar 2023 18:33:15 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> To: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN> <874jqtte7c.fsf@HIDDEN> <87bkl0frnk.fsf@HIDDEN> <CAFHYt565J8w1Rr59cW85xCBCA6nq+_0rA9z-UHtaSATfgdRnWg@HIDDEN> Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2023 21:33:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: <CAFHYt565J8w1Rr59cW85xCBCA6nq+_0rA9z-UHtaSATfgdRnWg@HIDDEN> (Felix Lechner's message of "Fri, 10 Mar 2023 10:22:56 -0800") Message-ID: <878rg2r95i.fsf@HIDDEN> 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-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Felix, Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@HIDDEN> writes: > Hi Ludo', > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 9:22=E2=80=AFAM Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN= g> wrote: >> >> 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 have no idea what happened there, but it may be best to be open and > direct about it. Would it be helpful for everyone to share details? It may help to shed a bit of light on the original reason I think this change came into existence, and in the interest of transparency and hopefully improving or finding alternatives to the proposed change, I consent to Ludovic openly discussing it, even if it involves a healthy dose of critique and looking inward. > Although you know that already, it would be best to avoid accusations > and look inward with statements like "I was unhappy about ... because > of ...." I might also avoid the word "you" and instead address all > messages to a third party. [...] > Also, why not retitle the bug as "Restore and improve our > consensus-based process"? I think this captures well what one of the issues I see with this change: it seems to be an attempt to resolve a local conflict (?) by apply a new global policy (which could be OK if the problem was widespread, but I doubt it is?), making everyone pay for it (via added bureaucracy). I've also pointed that if this is what it's trying to fix, it won't really help, since policy is not a substitute to consensus, and we're the same pool of people who will need to get along, whether as committers or as members of the same team. --=20 Thanks, Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Mar 2023 13:36:23 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Mar 11 08:36:23 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56800 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pazOZ-0002X5-3T for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 08:36:23 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f41.google.com ([209.85.221.41]:37516) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1pazOV-0002Wo-1B for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 08:36:21 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f41.google.com with SMTP id h14so7498478wru.4 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 05:36:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678541773; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Ao/e2OeREJYsLuTg6/ztWIdiL5x+TnkHZ9LlSgxI09c=; b=ARohNGqUwjJU7Wb/DlJgZkpi4VXPjm/59EPDZKw9XDX6ai3AFz0p8V0dBDdUTHxG9M 2Fch0dAg2zxFkVu4phGeB54BGipHAqEdGRvDMGArF7VCwfFvxani2wSObGnFyDhjcWz+ yh9Obws1pk2PAffgg4gETr/E1BelM3Ejuw6b4dW0018AZ16EFV8uAOGz7L/cnW+ZUg0C syw2L3cT7aQLf4+3JN8SbLH6xCqJ99Y9oyjVFvntgKpaWpA/bVJnMQEBsbBxBhuSD3zR DukTwUO/NszhP9pLxOWFg3kg8cTiSgZrMux+g5S8/MHfvyKQanw0uPZhNPf4JLAdCARX /Pdg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678541773; h=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=Ao/e2OeREJYsLuTg6/ztWIdiL5x+TnkHZ9LlSgxI09c=; b=0tCfDEUWhYKPgqAeIhpc47Cu7IOmtRuTQTJi4JRYnJEaKvsCdOgp3n4ib1JcHlghO5 BN/kk3K0VD/9gJLHngbHVVIAzET9OM2rIQS4epIprhQm3ZIksmA+oK/ex2YtFB1Z5XLm M0f7tXPPX6RKK1Y9P7IcNQV1ambjyeHaygCECvF2CuhTnfDUt/yxopBDvx9DSgJyRDoI F5JJBMMFJU9G/A9GmH7q5a/4E+fzXFRgzl/4Wwbha476yEXxuycZQa3tt3ZYky9GXOWe qfJwOFzGugIGMRFHSG8JU2x+JHWlxhc+NhsV1NebNJQnt9RAEftveZyfmmPj/hmeibng jrOA== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKVjBk3EYAN2jFBCD7mKq4KNbYR+I/0NjWa4zixvTTeoftHmgOT4 jPYtaJ133euHtjsH+rC3OSo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9tzWogZ6W5rFBxQ8UyOjHVFYEuTVFy1tosMrrY1CV/hPcSoPpTSL+yOljMOP1aCdSH9hOqCg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6287:0:b0:2c7:1210:fe61 with SMTP id k7-20020a5d6287000000b002c71210fe61mr2943482wru.3.1678541772919; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 05:36:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:65d2:2476:f637:db1e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l2-20020a5d4bc2000000b002c57475c375sm2502438wrt.110.2023.03.11.05.36.11 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 11 Mar 2023 05:36:12 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches In-Reply-To: <ZAu65VR4Nxo7Efys@jurong> References: <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAs8jT4wkjJJ6xPV@jurong> <87ilf8mry1.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAu65VR4Nxo7Efys@jurong> Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2023 14:20:46 +0100 Message-ID: <86356bbf0x.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, On Sat, 11 Mar 2023 at 00:19, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> wrote: > In the longer run I also agree with (b). But I am not sure it will be easy > to formulate a rule that captures well the intended policy and draws the > line between "trivial", anybody can push any time, and "complex", where more > opinions are needed, and maybe stages in between. It may be worth the trial. I agree. How to find the right balance between no guard and too many stones if not rocks crossing the path? Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2023 23:19:11 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Mar 10 18:19:11 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56116 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pam11-00056w-Ge for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:19:11 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:46892) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <andreas@HIDDEN>) id 1pam0z-00056h-Fx for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:19:09 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E70E617EF; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 00:19:03 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at hera.aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n03ihUzfCyJr; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 00:19:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from jurong (unknown [IPv6:2001:861:c4:f2f0::c64]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1F87C35E; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 00:19:03 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2023 00:19:01 +0100 From: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Message-ID: <ZAu65VR4Nxo7Efys@jurong> References: <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAs8jT4wkjJJ6xPV@jurong> <87ilf8mry1.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87ilf8mry1.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?iso-8859-15?Q?Court=E8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Am Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 06:33:58PM +0100 schrieb Simon Tournier: > However, for some packages or changes, the impact is far from being > trivial. I have in mind many changes that happen aside gnu/packages and > also some core packages (Guile, etc.). > For these kind of changes, it does not appear to me so crazy to ask more > than the submitter or committer eyes. That is true! So far, this has been handled by common sense of the people working on a patch (and sometimes that process then fails). > (b) that some implicit that worked until now needs to be more explicit. > And (b) does not mean strong all white or all black. In the longer run I also agree with (b). But I am not sure it will be easy to formulate a rule that captures well the intended policy and draws the line between "trivial", anybody can push any time, and "complex", where more opinions are needed, and maybe stages in between. It may be worth the trial. Andreas
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2023 18:23:39 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Mar 10 13:23:39 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55860 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pahP1-0005AE-EF for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 13:23:39 -0500 Received: from sail-ipv4.us-core.com ([208.82.101.137]:37342) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <felix.lechner@HIDDEN>) id 1pahOz-0005A4-Nk for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 13:23:38 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; s=2017; bh=yoD8MdZx8slhCor DP4E/DnCFawFYuk8262u3JzKZuA0=; h=cc:to:subject:date:from:in-reply-to: references; d=lease-up.com; b=ImmzRH8u9fOEVSICwSDfT4p07oIvZkiZHOagRW2T 9BWn2wm36EMrWBVYSuZF/zmv1ZWcP0UGvPWS8fgH/1J5UE6QFLg5x1MldE0IO24IhWocd6 megQqyPmCJslol86ejJ/9yY1Fw+OCqaloGF9kRg4vgOfUI7s13WC/BUpqSAEc= Received: by sail-ipv4.us-core.com (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id fbfb3a65 (TLSv1.3:TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256:256:NO) for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:23:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-f47.google.com with SMTP id j11so7751550lfg.13 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 10:23:35 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKVBeMEbEJyy4U62CtG+BPzDHZoAfA6+ri8kQk5ma9pBa8VzT1Uf z0Cy+GruHmA5G67XUgnchfmcWhayx1SSBKweCXc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/F4wGEJRGtGvfzDxZkPaf2lCwl0+4k3kc57x2WiQ90fhfRTukCTGIue1fgYJYmz/jvjuuMEGQ7JwfThPXgXKo= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4106:0:b0:4db:44f9:a641 with SMTP id b6-20020ac24106000000b004db44f9a641mr8439606lfi.6.1678472613235; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 10:23:33 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN> <874jqtte7c.fsf@HIDDEN> <87bkl0frnk.fsf@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <87bkl0frnk.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 10:22:56 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAFHYt565J8w1Rr59cW85xCBCA6nq+_0rA9z-UHtaSATfgdRnWg@HIDDEN> Message-ID: <CAFHYt565J8w1Rr59cW85xCBCA6nq+_0rA9z-UHtaSATfgdRnWg@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?UTF-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Ludo', On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 9:22=E2=80=AFAM Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN>= wrote: > > Like you I=E2=80=99m glad collaboration is nice and friendly; yet, over t= he past > few months I=E2=80=99ve experienced misunderstandings that seemingly brok= e the > consensus-based process that has always prevailed. I have no idea what happened there, but it may be best to be open and direct about it. Would it be helpful for everyone to share details? Although you know that already, it would be best to avoid accusations and look inward with statements like "I was unhappy about ... because of ...." I might also avoid the word "you" and instead address all messages to a third party. When unhappy, we could write to "Yogi Bear". Alternatives would be "Scooby-Doo" or "Winnie the Poo". They do something similar in the parliaments around the world. I picked unisex characters for that reason (although all three appear a bit more male than female). Also, why not retitle the bug as "Restore and improve our consensus-based process"? Thanks to everyone for working on Guix! We have a truly great, warm and welcoming community. Kind regards Felix
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2023 17:34:16 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Mar 10 12:34:16 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55801 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1pagdD-0003m3-Sp
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:34:16 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-f48.google.com ([209.85.128.48]:41826)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1pagdB-0003ln-My
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:34:14 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-f48.google.com with SMTP id
r19-20020a05600c459300b003eb3e2a5e7bso3978236wmo.0
for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:34:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678469647;
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=iezDp/0zqz+21p3zy1jBkjjl3URrRhNcx7ar8iYifw8=;
b=nqVuvU+WvxbFY9lv7zgi6by97K8FHAasY0h2Lq/qPEXwVjhLEaxoIegXbUEHbad2fe
0/sJX1A0kwBxbA8K2zOc8en0SJC3p7ypobHdzfuIZxcjbQmCO8GIJZLtOmg8orQc+6A+
hCy9WHOCuB3TNDB8oKPchgEvJqEHVZtItLKLQPQkGO6lDmS5y/VMZpglZgiiIbHFbwjr
daK3k0pzIgpsBG5trC2tMIfZDNbswkLq+gdBIyv8Bmphjk38FuVxP5w7B5y8ryA6vXgr
ul1TygpruzkVrdZqNc0WBRLr3AMLMJuV7RkKpk+0Mccfx9PTv0uBGiH28uGQ53ekqnQV
gm3g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678469648;
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=iezDp/0zqz+21p3zy1jBkjjl3URrRhNcx7ar8iYifw8=;
b=qK8QxXQBMaQpOdYWnKDlaVtXiFmUsjMOzWhAQSOsVUmi5odzmx7piesau4lVwMpdjD
k4mOJr33lC0I+IkWAnAhqE7AfhIsQ9iy/G7r/+hc4GT6l+gIPsSSpYP3BOmXL3hl2bhl
xE2U6TUiOLDTsmb+3AwK/7eTn0FO8p2Hd6q5QqwdTydxecZb+4eJgkWRz7Nhc80lQDJR
SlDrHpcnPK2tXPpmYxwu4BqgyyjECubDJq0v0dTYEDyvijLMRINqMkMF8CAgRUlk0sT/
Jbmo0B3/hafviD93pIXSyAJ2WlrSsuefkriMhQ78gDYyaL4ufgdNg2+xrdvVVsmnrYTN
v/LA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWPOwtOQ1K7T3vghcJ39f+YrpwRddjW648tWtpWAqC/S8Or/nAf
6l2nVLyHgjEoQthS1PKUb6M=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/HSUntEHGkb/fE6hTBWUOf9C0bSx4Ej/NCN/j7ayjbcMrhc63s93ZaBALhY2ix58znNt77jw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3ac5:b0:3e7:534a:694e with SMTP id
d5-20020a05600c3ac500b003e7534a694emr5703500wms.3.1678469647532;
Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:34:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pfiuh07 ([193.48.40.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
e25-20020a05600c219900b003e20a6fd604sm520362wme.4.2023.03.10.09.34.07
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:34:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
In-Reply-To: <ZAs8jT4wkjJJ6xPV@jurong>
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT>
<878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN>
<ZAs8jT4wkjJJ6xPV@jurong>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:33:58 +0100
Message-ID: <87ilf8mry1.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>,
Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
=?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi Andreas,
Re-reading the thread, I think we started with different frames. :-)
On ven., 10 mars 2023 at 15:19, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> wrote:
> while I am sensitive to your argument about privileges, I am afraid that
> the suggestion would remove privileges from the committers, while not
> bestowing them on anybody else; as a result, everybody would be worse off
> than before. Right now one out of the (let us be pessimistic) 20 active
> committers can push any patch from the issue tracker, say for a package
> trivially obtained via "guix import pypi ...". With the suggested change,
> the currently 1 (and in future hopefully one out of a few) members of the
> python group will have to approve the patch. In that situation, there is
> no incentive for anybody else to even look at the patch (without agency,
> why would one bother?), and we will effectively have split the Guix proje=
ct
> into a collection of walled gardens.
What you are pointing is that not all the teams are willing to
collaborate the same way. For sure I agree that updating a leaf package
does not require any more extra work =E2=80=93 processing the submission by=
the
committer is already enough boring work.
However, for some packages or changes, the impact is far from being
trivial. I have in mind many changes that happen aside gnu/packages and
also some core packages (Guile, etc.).
For these kind of changes, it does not appear to me so crazy to ask more
than the submitter or committer eyes. For instance, one can read from
recent messages,
this "trivial" patch implies a Julia (almost) world rebuild --
so potentially some breakages. And personally, I cannot run
again and again after broken packages from unrelated
changes. :-)
or
To be clear, it=E2=80=99s time-consuming and stressful. That=E2=80=
=99s not sane and I=E2=80=99d
rather not work that way.
https://yhetil.org/guix/CAJ3okZ3j+HTATsoGE978b+LGk0KAEM7-BAGSy_Gtm61FzTWwQA=
@mail.gmail.com
https://yhetil.org/guix/87cz5qyv10.fsf@HIDDEN
The wording of the patch is misleading but, I guess, the intent is to
smooth these kind of situations.
For sure, QA is helping a lot but there is still limitations. Consider
this thread [1] about updating Git. We do not have the capacity to let
QA check that all is fine. Again considering [1], it appears to me
reasonable to ask that more than two people (Greg and I) give a look,
thus this thread [1] appears to me sane.
For some changes aside packages, QA is helpless. Yeah we can improve
the Guix test suite and increase the coverage. But still, for some
changes, the collateral effect is often hard to evaluate. Hence, ask
for another look to be considered as green light appears to me fine.
I guess that the intent of this patch #61894 and I agree that the
wording is probably poor for that intent. :-)
Well, instead of closing, I think this patch requires an update.
Since Guix is growing and that=E2=80=99s a good thing, it implies two thing=
s:
(a) that more people are relying on it so for some part we need less
unexpected breakage and (b) that some implicit that worked until now
needs to be more explicit.
Yeah, the corollary of (a) is moving less fast for some part. But there
is no free lunch. ;-)
And (b) does not mean strong all white or all black.
Cheers,
simon
1: <https://yhetil.org/guix/20230217180402.29401-1-code@HIDDEN/#r>
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2023 17:22:20 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Mar 10 12:22:20 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55712 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pagRg-0003Ei-64 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:22:20 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52984) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pagRe-0003EU-IM for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:22:19 -0500 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 <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pagRX-0002Tw-Ce; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:22:11 -0500 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=6h5RBKRfi9SsOhuastEeQNDJUiML4nQMdaphg/ZVjtU=; b=dqsBU2AIDQlfoYGhmX36 pqy6ZA8mKMWZH5jWSAcxcM8bX4KlcD4acor4jw1bqTdNT8xVUeBOAzAqFQmwzMrZbWtyp3c1NZQgh JRAoWjAgb0MbnbQEgi4zWdieN8flxEE60z49mX7LvvcO/YRRdjQwPyKCmGMUDcd2bKlbFY+pY0QMX QQ3GGx+3WU8IKWUWLjtZSL8nkYOXFkjEwCB75zhLrNnvO5neBRESVGcnMPWHKxuuA9FPaG3Rt3csV hLtn7ce8/8vyWMusDcdmn5pMT2AmWRwaCrbbs7xmvud57xjDau9u0ti64U0TSEZjvUKdqrppHywCq 2j7JlP3+qX8SnA==; Received: from [193.50.110.253] (helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pagRW-0004j5-Gg; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:22:10 -0500 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN> <874jqtte7c.fsf@HIDDEN> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: =?utf-8?Q?D=C3=A9cadi?= 20 =?utf-8?Q?Vent=C3=B4se?= an 231 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour du Cordeau 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: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:22:07 +0100 In-Reply-To: <874jqtte7c.fsf@HIDDEN> (Maxim Cournoyer's message of "Thu, 09 Mar 2023 23:36:39 -0500") Message-ID: <87bkl0frnk.fsf@HIDDEN> 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-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hello Maxim and all! Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> skribis: >> With the proposed policy, members of a team would also have to review >> and approve each other=E2=80=99s work. Formal approval means getting an >> explicit =E2=80=9CLGTM=E2=80=9D (or similar) from at least one other tea= m member. > > In other words, to give teams the power to gate the changes touching > their scope. That's reasonable, if we have functional teams. I'd argue > we aren't there yet. I kinda agree; bootstrapping issue then? I hope the maintainer team can help make teams =E2=80=9Cmore functional=E2= =80=9D, whatever that teams. It=E2=80=99s really what maintainership is about in G= uix; it=E2=80=99s not about writing code. > And also: >> I think it avoids the unavoidable misunderstandings that can arise in >> a growing group and help pacify day-to-day collaboration. > > Again, "pacify" irks me a bit in this sentence, given I consider > collaboration has and continues to be cordial in our community, unless > I've been living under a rock. =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 broke = the consensus-based process that has always prevailed. In a way, that=E2=80=99s probably bound to happen as the group grows, and I think that=E2=80=99s why we must be explicit about what the process is and = about whether one is expressing consent or dissent. With so many things happening in Guix (yay!), it=E2=80=99s also easy to ove= rlook 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. It is not about asserting power or building= a hierarchy; it=E2=80=99s about formalizing existing relations and processes. I hope this clarifies my position! Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2023 14:20:09 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Mar 10 09:20:09 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54135 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1padbN-00038V-61 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:20:09 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:47176) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <andreas@HIDDEN>) id 1padbK-00037r-Qg for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:20:08 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2BB79EC; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 15:19:59 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at hera.aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BTlTWFlGUnS9; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 15:19:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from jurong (unknown [IPv6:2001:861:c4:f2f0::c64]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 274152B1; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 15:19:59 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 15:19:57 +0100 From: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Message-ID: <ZAs8jT4wkjJJ6xPV@jurong> References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?iso-8859-15?Q?Court=E8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello Simon, Am Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 10:46:08AM +0100 schrieb Simon Tournier: > Hierarchy already exists, as in any social group, as in any group of > people collaborating. The hierarchy is currently informal. while I am sensitive to your argument about privileges, I am afraid that the suggestion would remove privileges from the committers, while not bestowing them on anybody else; as a result, everybody would be worse off than before. Right now one out of the (let us be pessimistic) 20 active committers can push any patch from the issue tracker, say for a package trivially obtained via "guix import pypi ...". With the suggested change, the currently 1 (and in future hopefully one out of a few) members of the python group will have to approve the patch. In that situation, there is no incentive for anybody else to even look at the patch (without agency, why would one bother?), and we will effectively have split the Guix project into a collection of walled gardens. I think this suggestion has the potential to make a stuttering project grind to a complete halt. And I am afraid that we are on a track to replacing joy, agency and community by grind and bureaucracy. I suggest to close this issue due to a weak consensus against the proposal (or at least the lack of a clear consensus for it). Andreas
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2023 04:36:50 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 09 23:36:50 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53439 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1paUUr-0001GD-SA for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 23:36:50 -0500 Received: from mail-qv1-f49.google.com ([209.85.219.49]:35726) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1paUUp-0001Fy-R7 for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 23:36:48 -0500 Received: by mail-qv1-f49.google.com with SMTP id ff4so2958383qvb.2 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 20:36:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678423002; h=content-transfer-encoding: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=pfudZ9/5sWdVXb3fwj0bs7kGS2NjWlgp2ascV0LFvQQ=; b=EfQgSZSX8LU/s56T6HwWtfCsX0is5vyKj9OPMkjN3nIVrx0qZrkaGFtRPiLbAzftIe FVlkPnqDnWFvTB0B4pGX656Hd0PrF7QKtmOY72n6eKPhJaOpiEUUzzOmNje2Jlze4oLx jY8sS2LD3m16pK/Tntud9vFtXVtEpTJRh8ZiztQOaSxkD/+8PzcI9aHR57vxfGe38UMS ZeN3wXRHCc+6uoctDQYcOX1R7NI2imLEhSd4+8FbaQZ0eFLnrM10568lPBN2pnctxSTx z9w6gjnoufI58Te0o+Sbz9lwih+K5G4UrwVGj7yOSupHpspcchM/ub5uUwq4b1NuhdmS JG1g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678423002; h=content-transfer-encoding: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=pfudZ9/5sWdVXb3fwj0bs7kGS2NjWlgp2ascV0LFvQQ=; b=KfhTIJVLoPukcEiCE+BNaOBq5Wevay2cp7vgoR7uQ9BhmwRZcPeZIH6mtV9UEINM+L y35Np/PcyLK2qCq6fm0D62t6DfD0Ltz5VwRDpj1Zxkxr0QfjL9OpyYEhmVIkL0dYpehR zMlg9faLFZZBKaHo0S/zDu2p+GDcCICa0lUPpCHDzLJX9ysXtHuN3JMHHDiOLhDxvhCJ avVCaWGhVddcj5bzJPCLKXyrMsLLwjT9O8Im4i2EviVjhCj/SKqBVD0PPpJ5fFLeDimN yQ6aut+Fm0273gHoh/swHv1ACt474dggyJXIwB2PHoPz6CY+/sWbHzKljhKcf+9UAcUa rDLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXiOsYPaR8QDXJjx5Z3vhZBSpTvNMBF3yerxI3S8q3sN82JDLXL TjaOtDNYacNoG/Fm6EGJwPw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set950fNWis83dnOCeDkj2dDgTrfpQKYwyQRmlO5boV+4KWi4syVheK/vBDr6lz34g0fezlI1tg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:1248:b0:56f:8b5:3e94 with SMTP id r8-20020a056214124800b0056f08b53e94mr1206818qvv.14.1678423002109; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 20:36:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from hurd ([2607:fad8:4:3::1000]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f4-20020a37d204000000b0073b967b9b35sm604410qkj.106.2023.03.09.20.36.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 09 Mar 2023 20:36:41 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 23:36:39 -0500 In-Reply-To: <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Thu, 09 Mar 2023 10:46:08 +0100") Message-ID: <874jqtte7c.fsf@HIDDEN> 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-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Simon et al., Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: > Hi Maxim, > > On Wed, 08 Mar 2023 at 12:05, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>= wrote: > >> 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. > > Hierarchy already exists, as in any social group, as in any group of > people collaborating. The hierarchy is currently informal. > > And it is not really =E2=80=9Cpretty flat=E2=80=9D because some individua= ls from that > group have more (informal) power than other. That=E2=80=99s not necessar= y a bad > thing. :-) For instance, the access to the build farms is restricted, > the ability to restart Cuirass job is restricted, commit access is > restricted, money spending is restricted, etc. Apologies for starting a tangent (which is interesting in its own!). Rewinding to the beginning, I believe the novelty proposed in this patch is (quoting the original message): > With the proposed policy, members of a team would also have to review > and approve each other=E2=80=99s work. Formal approval means getting an > explicit =E2=80=9CLGTM=E2=80=9D (or similar) from at least one other team= member. In other words, to give teams the power to gate the changes touching their scope. That's reasonable, if we have functional teams. I'd argue we aren't there yet. And also: > I think it avoids the unavoidable misunderstandings that can arise in > a growing group and help pacify day-to-day collaboration. Again, "pacify" irks me a bit in this sentence, given I consider collaboration has and continues to be cordial in our community, unless I've been living under a rock. --=20 Thanks, Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Mar 2023 09:51:40 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 09 04:51:40 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50934 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1paCvz-0007Tp-SA
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 04:51:40 -0500
Received: from mail-wr1-f41.google.com ([209.85.221.41]:40804)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1paCvv-0007TO-Di
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 04:51:36 -0500
Received: by mail-wr1-f41.google.com with SMTP id t15so1233412wrz.7
for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 01:51:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678355489;
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=Eltd2lnDJbkjlqwRXX6HnaNs9annVubF52bIH4fFkeQ=;
b=UIJetbxQ82XSL4IPmPLaPcjMkSjFvOa+QaPpug+nJAtm8tEe+Ld4u6QcEnpSJ3HPPg
QidcWfc2dn1mkRagnqQFllfmD7xbh7FGMMF6JIWogvPE0/OgwaF3/u9NxDOhlGxo92vD
DpUPRruOOp5nKYR8aetDBv88O3HA+3lJNme0hUxPsM4+7xW6lZwgnXVNTmSiTZfbtEQD
bV9S62QDadKzknPbLXdxQg0/nBxsKOAyZNX1nPmaqe9mDeWy67rGwxrTtUDTF//v0gL9
aKBl18dwlcw7CSoXCljRxB34a7ep4Vv6kUQvBi3sfz6D39rKZJ3S/NrmxPIpRLVTbWXg
cF8A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678355489;
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=Eltd2lnDJbkjlqwRXX6HnaNs9annVubF52bIH4fFkeQ=;
b=j5F4UHiZXcpdZDk8o11fXbuKEqrPM6krFu/mxOdH3Gjc7S8BGrodBlYQd/mNI95+r4
7b/3mHVQLMoLsVqsEsdk+YomHJPkjbvlAMsPtgwq6oFt39O7ZVQ0NtiDsT4djUorHJ7W
Y1CQIGnLNVjTRycR4PLu4UAJTchVLxdJLRg5jdzt7bnPD5ZgspiN6gjwt6WaTyVdggHx
aHAnrRhvNNUyWbIp/IUCjaLFiMOxtiN/PVKuNHOAA9S+QlgADsK7E3wmvC3PC89vCaF/
yQZwCZg4xBV1x+5w6DIImRf/3POYU28OmTc7l/59wcvrUVOhol5JIipbrfeXwyZtLCrw
WrjA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWvLMPOTsuA/C5blPqKAaFr7uKnN3NOQ2wPbMfQaQr/FeEOYWjT
PgMAnq9A+eLwh1PVl4Ilnjc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8KCrv9Jz1D/Gy+GEMBlRtuthrmAFtlzP6Qjk1M7YWWEl3GiDNKl+PUASjFJmZpmUFHB/MhAA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:11c8:b0:2c7:1b49:b2db with SMTP id
i8-20020a05600011c800b002c71b49b2dbmr14716700wrx.5.1678355489484;
Thu, 09 Mar 2023 01:51:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([157.99.255.254]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
z17-20020a5d44d1000000b002c58ca558b6sm17269870wrr.88.2023.03.09.01.51.28
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 09 Mar 2023 01:51:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
In-Reply-To: <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT>
<878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 10:46:08 +0100
Message-ID: <86lek6ntpb.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
=?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
guix-devel@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi Maxim,
On Wed, 08 Mar 2023 at 12:05, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> w=
rote:
> 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.
Hierarchy already exists, as in any social group, as in any group of
people collaborating. The hierarchy is currently informal.
And it is not really =E2=80=9Cpretty flat=E2=80=9D because some individuals=
from that
group have more (informal) power than other. That=E2=80=99s not necessary =
a bad
thing. :-) For instance, the access to the build farms is restricted,
the ability to restart Cuirass job is restricted, commit access is
restricted, money spending is restricted, etc.
What I see as a bad thing is the informal part.
Far from me the willing of being confrontational, I just would like to
point that you are somehow on the top of the =E2=80=9Chierarchy=E2=80=9D so=
you see it
as =E2=80=9Cpretty flat=E2=80=9D, when it is not. And if you want to exper=
iment, try to
spend one month using only guix-devel and guix-patches for collaborating
and you will see. :-)
That=E2=80=99s said, Guix is awesome! I came because technical features an=
d I
am still here because the community is welcoming, friendly, helping and
I really enjoy the way we are collaborating altogether.
I totally agree that everyone can participate and we, as a group, are
trying hard to be welcoming and friendly, so that everybody can
participate and/or acquire more knowledge and/or skill, and from my
point of view, we try hard to take into account all the voices. By
daily interactions, we are doing our best in this area =E2=80=93 even often
rehashing how we can improve. And for what it is worth, I will do all
my best so that this will not change. :-)
Now, we, as a community of volunteers, have one problem, well, two
related problems:
(1) not enough people are reviewing
(2) there is no =E2=80=9Cduty=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Caccountability=E2=80=9D
These is becoming more apparent because Guix is growing and that=E2=80=99s a
good thing. And we have to adapt our practices for a better scaling, IMHO.
This =E2=80=9Cteams=E2=80=9D is somehow a proposal as an attempt to address=
(1) and (2).
Please, do not take me wrong with the quoted duty and accountability.
Motivation by volunteers is non-fungible, for sure. That=E2=80=99s does not
mean that a subgroup cannot commit for some tasks. That=E2=80=99s already =
the
case, guix-maintainers is committed to =E2=80=9Cduties=E2=80=9D as explaine=
d by [1].
For instance, it reads =C2=AB the other responsibilities can be delegated:
- Making releases.
- Dealing with development and its everyday issues as well as =E2=80=A6
- Participating in [internship progam]
- Organizing [events]
- Taking care of Guix money =E2=80=A6
- Keeping the build farm infrastructure up
- Keeping the web site up-to-date.
- Looking after people
=C2=BB
Therefore, could you please point me who or how these responsibilities
are delegated? From my point of view, =E2=80=9Cteams=E2=80=9D is an attemp=
t to
accomplish that delegation.
Me too, I am not convinced that the heavy =E2=80=9Cbureaucracy=E2=80=9C of =
Debian is
something that I would like with Guix. However, there is gap between
the addition of more explicit structure in Guix as =E2=80=9Cteams=E2=80=9D =
is a proposal
and keep the current informal structure.
Cheers,
simon
1: https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/gnu-guix-maintainer-collective-expands/
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Mar 2023 09:51:35 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 09 04:51:35 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50931 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1paCvv-0007TY-Cu
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 04:51:35 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-f43.google.com ([209.85.128.43]:39683)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1paCvs-0007TJ-U7
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 04:51:33 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-f43.google.com with SMTP id
t25-20020a1c7719000000b003eb052cc5ccso3130328wmi.4
for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 01:51:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678355487;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=ZlV+9ZcUr84gijiXxlRt8E7tdeDR+WguaZsWNkkrheU=;
b=Vd+qvG+2un1UdY7KBHdAPOxKjUTuAaYBLg9S7Ibir4fJtyxbgn9he3nBhsDTspuaXm
OMc52YiuRdL+i0wsveTHZau/sIDej4tA95mAKE52mB06fXwlPHlRaGUMFzbFyOQ36+1x
Yoqa76SetLC2MMigMzt0WudR/8hQM4qXdaMM1ZcLzUyl4odB0PHmDpUXNQ1gkYGgOzfE
meIfTikKvzuouQw3IvY5c/zX5ksJtEQOdfbA8t4wCm3yjKNPppHh6LS+Qyydgg1MDu3h
xncY7K4L08K3XiRCPXo9rlG6sqY3uRdZ5bXdWXCbi50qWV818u+e8VFJqUvJDyAoWZKn
vFsg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678355487;
h=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=ZlV+9ZcUr84gijiXxlRt8E7tdeDR+WguaZsWNkkrheU=;
b=HG80hFqqbCUWT6JcWTuhDBtMKZi7HiFoiwH67IxqjQ8aJ7zEPrg87LngpZ3PQ7cjUg
4mAgb8nLJlYIoK7/dHbLuImKsPDMwQN5tQ12LqbkydwY1nkEee7cGAg5Xbsz4/E5LTV1
kT375v6g+0djcWM72Ek7KYFUXdX4PcBycV193ab5bSXJiZNzkeRt2zVpE4YPhWcmDbJX
k9keovYXqE8pkGALUtcC93lbdG4zt5W0yRFT+XAWrOAMfQbLwyiMcb5t9QL46uCSRYIZ
qdAEVE/k9QbGrCQeilmIKxEV7U7LzskBClkoVTainrHBDvCCmiSLFUH0L+PpvUmkYYi5
Fztw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKX232Irm+yJ/xO6deiqM2yZZ3QIDkRT8+PD9YrJhKrqim6mDl48
ayq4w3Bd9a7ID3GKh29K8h0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8TWMiLONevLmVm6E0xJV4rLNUYrKptA7mCp9VqGOv0u+lFEm+tkLvxDCLhb4oTJdP7ak+thw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1c1e:b0:3df:f7ba:14f8 with SMTP id
j30-20020a05600c1c1e00b003dff7ba14f8mr1583777wms.1.1678355486848;
Thu, 09 Mar 2023 01:51:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([157.99.255.254]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
j4-20020a05600c1c0400b003dc5b59ed7asm2289191wms.11.2023.03.09.01.51.25
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 09 Mar 2023 01:51:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Leo Famulari
<leo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
In-Reply-To: <874jqvul1v.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAe9arZFiCihLH7o@HIDDEN>
<874jqvul1v.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 09:48:21 +0100
Message-ID: <86v8janwdm.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
=?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
guix-devel@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi,
On Wed, 08 Mar 2023 at 13:58, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> wrote:
> number of their R package updates (thanks!)). It seems starting to use
> the 'Reviewed-by' git message tag would make this easy to account for.
Quoting from thread [1]:
I agree that Reviewed-by would be helpful.
Once reviewed, the author or the reviewer could roll the count and
re-send the patch (or series), applying the line Reviewed-by.
It would reward the reviewer for their work. And it would help the
committer work.
Subject: Thoughts on committers pushing simple changes from other committers?
1: <https://yhetil.org/guix/86k00avhpv.fsf@HIDDEN>
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Mar 2023 05:12:24 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 09 00:12:24 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50657 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pa8Zj-0003Rh-Uj for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 00:12:24 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-f173.google.com ([209.85.160.173]:46051) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1pa8Zi-0003RV-Gk for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 00:12:22 -0500 Received: by mail-qt1-f173.google.com with SMTP id d7so833310qtr.12 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 21:12:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678338737; 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=NYBnKAo5eMLrdrOknu4EWE2afBWSx+JsPBVTU2OqUrA=; b=L9xhWbxK6e1dh9ByfYfr0XjxVXWO82sUO29gp/I5AgWgztaT514TVuVdOFMw+ohKUm z9q8m6H8BoNNOGqLsMGTgHz19RHd+3yFM4Tzy7KmCfcHaYCt5JI9BB3OX/la5v0FDl/h paBK2V+/onFFbdGGc8B01Sv9AkvWYh4M8kq5L2byzHcVDu5QGkS0qNL18Ahah2Q4ezoC Ur/PUq2QeKOXtnRWvaJoRvlouKsYkCkR5wjgGlSeDiwg0LY0WVCPdrOJ/kUj9rnkuaGM 99iYSzREde+QhbjMxUDWwyCDWv2a+q7AvX1fKB/iHwJ6E433/zRZ8c8x8orbZMi2wv95 RZcg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678338737; 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=NYBnKAo5eMLrdrOknu4EWE2afBWSx+JsPBVTU2OqUrA=; b=BAiX07vDojBfkZL2yZde5Uh7KRAbxwJkkQphXBv8/vjJwMMBbA3fb0QW8xbxG3DR7q baRWwGQ4a04TzskYFYyPvIJahZDSfbNUMBK+s/DxhgdniK3RwydXFP7Te0TMG3O1BmOr RvavfPqgGGIdRX48i7kOB7nS5pKLA3BepZ4WVm5MtWSD5/C7nhUIafyzLACleYzKDSE0 t3kLPUTVHjVN1VlXnvY8ijrYqfnmzpQbkkie7bOQ/tKpa93IojYpnezvy3iLQ0C28NXN +ipInVHdc1hrV/DQq5oIMnlYxpwVRR15st5/EZh83MpYhSbwvIJ2iBFvspwfvvZVyEt2 go+w== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWdqUd25hNuGr3xfFXRMKBT6yF5rzLpW38khb6BCG6/4HrvyFnl 72z95Tuk34o73mR60Ne1xOs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set80FZVWSwtEDsNz+ZEmEJZt/t9bHuqPdmPzuwuzb1fIJ4pQztS/fMYx2eH/04lZ56UA7oKkxQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:48:b0:3ba:1d8d:f6d0 with SMTP id y8-20020a05622a004800b003ba1d8df6d0mr38263497qtw.23.1678338737027; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 21:12:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from hurd ([2607:fad8:4:3::1000]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g66-20020a37b645000000b00743049c2b15sm12708029qkf.66.2023.03.08.21.12.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 08 Mar 2023 21:12:16 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> To: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfeeg6fk.fsf@yucca> Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 00:12:14 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87sfeeg6fk.fsf@yucca> (Vagrant Cascadian's message of "Wed, 08 Mar 2023 15:38:23 -0800") Message-ID: <87pm9itsnl.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN> writes: [...] > I almost wonder if it wouldn't be good to spell out what exactly is > desired to be accomplished by having teams? Maybe much of that > conversation has already happened, but ... spelling it out first, and > then trying to come up with implementation details that attempt to fit > the goals? I believe the original goal of teams was to offer a more focus stream of patches to review for those adhering to a specific team. I'll let the implementers of teams.scm correct me if I got that wrong :-). -- Thanks, Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Mar 2023 23:38:52 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 08 18:38:52 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50416 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pa3Mj-0000MA-Ew for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 18:38:52 -0500 Received: from cascadia.aikidev.net ([173.255.214.101]:42154) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <vagrant@HIDDEN>) id 1pa3Mh-0000Ls-GQ for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 18:38:36 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:21:7:77:0:40]) (Authenticated sender: vagrant@HIDDEN) by cascadia.aikidev.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAB891AB7B; Wed, 8 Mar 2023 15:38:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=debian.org; s=1.vagrant.user; t=1678318707; bh=VNzi8j7+pAyOqtvHpUm8c2DBadO++q7UxIZhphjsSKE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=L/HoRrDKSQZkaeNhCeuk0NEDHZ0hvPm5mV1JM0ZK8unl2rpNBZUTuveULcr4m8dXV CiCAMm9NBSaLnBd8kPhTnF9M4xhggHVC+mRaatIDwaEtLuT1TaSQ5e8LHqZsPilv9F S2MHeOPHJ9hch6dbu0N+0lDVBQovuB/ReflWg2H7BhfmESOISkKfiU6Jq8mV7E26tK 9MTNjFy9U3LOeJxuYQUuZz4YstaHJH+Q+Kr3XyKdP059Xoxj4UWDq0sreGg/8BOPcb lbV8W7rBtX8IM9ij2eM3L3KAgSc6C5mqmXJCjdQpiZr5szCvLHc0FOSCR+yYIHfxYY g5jZLf+PmCLag== From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN> To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches In-Reply-To: <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 15:38:23 -0800 Message-ID: <87sfeeg6fk.fsf@yucca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On 2023-03-08, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: > 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. I have been watching this thread with great curiosity for exactly this reason! One of the things I like about Guix, coming from a couple decades of involvement with Debian, is the lack of package "ownership" ... in Debian, any Debian Developer with upload rights can technically upload any package, but it is considered inappropriate to do so without following various processes. Over the years, ways to opt-in to streamlined processes now exist, but the norm is still very much package "ownership". Guix is starting from a much more flexible model, but struggling with challenges of scale ... a small number of people maintaining a huge number of packages. I am a bit concerned that formalizing this much process for teams just yet... There is not much granularity of team scope and responsibilities. The current teams implementation seems to involve claiming one or more gnu/packages/*.scm files (or other files)... but not individual packages or groups of packages within one of those. It seems quite rough around the edges and I am concerned about how it will play out to further formalize the process. I almost wonder if it wouldn't be good to spell out what exactly is desired to be accomplished by having teams? Maybe much of that conversation has already happened, but ... spelling it out first, and then trying to come up with implementation details that attempt to fit the goals? I have a hunch that this dish might benefit from a bit more seasoning. I am not sure exactly which herbs and spices to reach for, or how long to leave it simmering on the stove... but I know people are getting hungry! live well, vagrant --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCZAkcbwAKCRDcUY/If5cW qmHJAP9bADxJJnp4Yfb83jTKQqBynGhPshg7AZKhDNC/o5HEZAD/UUXpuQKaOSrq gr3i3eSV40gpVWsxXO0/uH5V4uMY7QY= =HNIA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Mar 2023 18:59:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 08 13:59:02 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50239 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pZz0A-0004tr-8U for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 13:59:02 -0500 Received: from mail-qv1-f50.google.com ([209.85.219.50]:47037) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1pZz08-0004tX-An for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 13:59:00 -0500 Received: by mail-qv1-f50.google.com with SMTP id f1so11734686qvx.13 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 10:59:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678301934; 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=xzge6Ydj0gDCbVkJBlltguSHhZICK+xNbWoWldPbevc=; b=RKNqO/orYoKZLcyts9lVOTRO+sjcFtjxmtwBgXQmn5hAB4IlQz/bdNKfA2VwtsL4Vt XKFK11n2Hmmtjp+iT0gY0QhKRmgam+T2QnkbTKZ24iHFTd2tvofnqClP7d0taO8pt9dw kAmDHit/tMsDoR8vYdG4ob5beSsUExSd4IlePe/DgiAKJMOSNPPBsc3izj20AvgNKNz3 DH9KmuZXZ6Isf3Tk4vfaU70HF0zHZjEI/RAQ3hsP5imTha6GuG2V86rcwD5z0kpZY6ff PE0c3dMcNhNSgt0gXw7dVTNQPW26OuKwXTbl3CZiRKB/crhA3g4efQNJXqxaOIQA9DDY eqWA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678301934; 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=xzge6Ydj0gDCbVkJBlltguSHhZICK+xNbWoWldPbevc=; b=nARn0y83WgDaToxnGmepyNwKL7ezIIzXd9N14/u/qt5ztctRoR2cFzL6q7l82R1uAd l8z3Kult79uGWPFSd/FVXbfoomh9O9eTU1v7rt/tIEea26h3UVHzVPW3jIIrn6nCR6gI fAu7snhFiORHFPUquHb/a7Da3QcSu9tP64kmj4nSzev+XtA9Lzafa6GO0xdsfphfCuh4 JOfUSZxlgLJ3xUG6KEd49GcASjndVfX6M748DsevlCzOXWleBNedfh6cY+Jhsd2MPcKv MWH8xH3uwijuXQIFNXJNyQdpn74O1SjPzLf2G5V3PczqPU8OYwFClUIhqWNj3f+AleBU CXAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUuSOJBN+cw+0nCJb+gfYnWje+B1XTjbzVRnrzB3lcrwSFactWl hOLHMPjoMf1skKkXECNy/js= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+eEtnp+6Xz9F2H0NK1zH2uZhzGF8mwdH2M9kJiItApziuzltwh1Oa12Nx1LHN5raUqYsZCuw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2aa8:b0:56e:f1fd:f16c with SMTP id js8-20020a0562142aa800b0056ef1fdf16cmr36519592qvb.20.1678301934666; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 10:58:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from hurd ([2607:fad8:4:3::1000]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 82-20020a370755000000b007423a896659sm12019855qkh.86.2023.03.08.10.58.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 08 Mar 2023 10:58:54 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> To: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAe9arZFiCihLH7o@HIDDEN> Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 13:58:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: <ZAe9arZFiCihLH7o@HIDDEN> (Leo Famulari's message of "Tue, 7 Mar 2023 17:40:42 -0500") Message-ID: <874jqvul1v.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Leo, Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> writes: [...] > In release announcements, alongside to the the normal `git shortlog` > list of authors, I suggest also publicizing the list of committers: > > `git shortlog --numbered --summary --committer v1.4.0..HEAD` > > A small thing, but hopefully one of many incentives to review and > commit. Seems an easy thing to do; but in the context of this discussion we'd like to emphasizes the reviewers rather than just the committers (otherwise Ricardo would always appear at the top, thanks to the sheer number of their R package updates (thanks!)). It seems starting to use the 'Reviewed-by' git message tag would make this easy to account for. -- Thanks, Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Mar 2023 17:05:35 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 08 12:05:34 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50091 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pZxEM-0001pq-Dn for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 12:05:34 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-f177.google.com ([209.85.160.177]:47016) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1pZxEK-0001pb-Lb for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 12:05:33 -0500 Received: by mail-qt1-f177.google.com with SMTP id c19so18746525qtn.13 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 09:05:32 -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=1bPWp2hk3BT74gVLykcISWeVcst41yGxb/zyunODu+zCtckML/8hy1xWn79bYrdbFt 0eQ6ROzQKreGuB5dfuElolAXdjLLFX/pnmW4Wt+12AiVF9FiHIrA4vQETXdylPa1GptS fX5HDWV/9RVMEplAnIPZ10voVOqS77BCAOBtu3RuadqCYJODTh7L1Q7xG4QF3xYvaO1b OLEuUfQtTWVnv9To1wvLUWvpekD2ae019Wq8tx5eQG6UCuiYOi1CmbB8iErXN2o7L32x sdXXWw7sHEiW39NGiorLWykXvbuwcLBrJZq54HqQ0F5qaGlRpkuBXu6QmYzuTOBjzike Xewg== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUWISKCZNNIHbzcotxnqIKN17c30WCnSBpqvoO+OkNzSrLo7vDG joC1ELt0d0fVI0iYwyspRgg= 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 <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 12:05:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> (Efraim Flashner's message of "Wed, 8 Mar 2023 11:12:35 +0200") Message-ID: <878rg7uqb4.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Efraim, Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN> writes: > On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 01:29:51PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 at 11:36, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> 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
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Mar 2023 09:12:53 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 08 04:12:53 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47784 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pZpqr-0002s1-J6 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 04:12:53 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-f43.google.com ([209.85.128.43]:37801) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <efraim.flashner@HIDDEN>) id 1pZpqm-0002rm-Dd for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 04:12:48 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f43.google.com with SMTP id j19-20020a05600c1c1300b003e9b564fae9so756239wms.2 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 01:12:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678266758; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yPphrj7XSDXM3xcCD5uzvfa2BDEDVNOhqzm5ICu/ENM=; b=LmHgWLwZMiubbTjKhRoXN68nEdssxBTvaGv2hFbE1QWH0XnOoq+Ym5HM3lH4nTrYkj cPCE9EjF1+0jOwuwvBXGtAMQUBnPik0cLRwupUt5qD9ENTOhc3TSl7gsgvACZNqlV9Qb vRpYuaJcFbgOjCtChRkLdCaJpETclWTL1sjomnCsGfMKvTlLryHyuJK/PVXaGVoV1n/J 028S9FTGdRdpSCEEZWoj2sEeb2GbIq/56kWlDttw5qLm4gSj8SKgsFRejC4WwXmqShkO rxzSP7hgKXW57YixiXB/hK+pZ570WtKFcqdnXNFVSH883kD/WcuComFEabkXfF964FQC PtMg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678266758; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:sender :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yPphrj7XSDXM3xcCD5uzvfa2BDEDVNOhqzm5ICu/ENM=; b=GBhmUYeECCINB1NrykTqSvCoc0cfSYY8nw70lRrbGR/Mh4E818oZe2K3cFzw+2d/ar +HEdwUX3ymz63luLb1gSHwlfa7YNK9jg09FV4Z/cv6+vJzbvqHDq4rnE2SHSd89OPqMy 8vaOjQf7gDMsaj9/h3/1NTggynotfaDuZJn0yV04DAONHt3bleFYAboMu6lazuK2eZLy 6qFHDwOd4+FPEwBGargOMf1camcqLRRgM3C2VNN6TYFgLXd62HpvOZ0Ev5iRmmaylwD9 WhL57lc42c5xpq3LhWuGqv82VmiANO+OqgG/YklCcTfdXi03bbi4QwCuyzw5gPaVH/EH v+SA== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKVMUgd2TaXVEmJdi9zbiVikaQe6W73/TFX29lHmmr51b/YidkZ2 I2WAlJVZet247IK17ZW44rM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9QPq6JTYO+2Qg8BvjXfzbnm4dFn1VI6YbVll+ZZaGCHoiAI/MtIarUmZgg8qyrrd7ZtxrwNA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1990:b0:3e2:20c7:6553 with SMTP id t16-20020a05600c199000b003e220c76553mr15866454wmq.13.1678266758325; Wed, 08 Mar 2023 01:12:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2a02:ed3:910:9200:b62e:99ff:fef0:7bc0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f18-20020a05600c43d200b003dec22de1b1sm14877656wmn.10.2023.03.08.01.12.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 08 Mar 2023 01:12:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 11:12:35 +0200 From: Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN> To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Message-ID: <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT> Mail-Followup-To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2NcYJPI+XQbEUpl9" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x41AAE7DCCA3D8351 X-PGP-Key: https://flashner.co.il/~efraim/efraim_flashner.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) --2NcYJPI+XQbEUpl9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 01:29:51PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: > Hi Simon, >=20 > Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: >=20 > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 at 11:36, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> 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 vac= ation > >> or otherwise busy a patch could be pushed without this additional o= ne > >> 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. :-) >=20 > 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. > 1. Our pool of reviewers would likely continue to be spread too thin. >=20 > 2. The 2 weeks time window would quickly slip, even with a team looking > at a more focused backlog, or the reviews would only be of the kind "I > think that's not what we want" without more time or energy to offer the > kind of concrete insights that can be turned into action for the > submitter. >=20 > 3. The team member might be tempted to take their chance and merge their > change with little to no feedback, or feedback they perceived > insufficient or not actionable enough to justify keeping their > submission in limbo for longer. >=20 > I think the main problem we have is social, not organizational. There's > little incentive to jump into the laborious review process compared to > hack on something we like in our free time. We need to promote and > value review work more, without making it feel like a compulsory chore. > That's a great challenge to solve for a project that's driven by > volunteers. >=20 > I'll venture a suggestion to explore: adding enticements to review (some > playful guidelines such as "while waiting for your 2 weeks review > period, please try to review twice as many other submissions that have > been patiently waiting on the patches tracker :-)", or some stats > crunched and advertised periodically to guix-devel or even our to our > blog about our top reviewers, etc.). >=20 > --=20 > Maxim --=20 Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN> =D7=90=D7=A4=D7=A8=D7=99=D7=9D = =D7=A4=D7=9C=D7=A9=D7=A0=D7=A8 GPG key =3D A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted --2NcYJPI+XQbEUpl9 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEoov0DD5VE3JmLRT3Qarn3Mo9g1EFAmQIUYAACgkQQarn3Mo9 g1GabA/+LdbM9RAD112kpI5IqGPfoB4dLnKOuxtupvmsyOX/UfxuJsW61d37Pyaf GQmwSakLaaoz0o3q+TyyEyTcp4lex/soWMEDdktTJG9GkOAERksTDw8EVPKoz5PQ 37Tm02IinKDBTRB6nXiFHIMReaj/5HXApLFL2n91nNc1+vuI/UYjKvy5MlFtHDmw aUd99qWzegg+YEUmX0UF+1wLFyFY9veou8ADki758v/J4lDpZvFp41bkCmX4R4iX hXhw5FvJ6aKHaDdutrErTtrRxKb8O3HHlNAszYg/zzh3ySsOc8g6eyA+eks5N8up lCu5qHT8xaESKN+YYR26O8wySv4yjVsOL3Pq2cL1UdNDkK1Wvih58XArGjqyDaah GZDhlnfG4RVgLMwWl2sDRqpnp+/VQjK3JyeVFkbTfN5bfxl1uJwwEXwG/+UHIQ9K 9r5pcEoq3xQcASiBxDdpmTqfQ5wKk7ZJ1VxW5qHtPIHbmpLIqj4zbbVLyixdVpBk 1CgAutNAw37N2rZCOoBilrMrPdK4lWGlcZlei1dCYzrMRsT1iQblUO0GSEmttD/A sL2LElfCh3QBa3NaL/JAQrgoAwrLIRpKi3NIGwV8z3VCsm36nSsJJDx9yOQLyDhV 4hJBQW5oKDF/uv2ehOyzXk6/v3SiWG/TQMSTuDiV3g8PB3CySrI= =AQPg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2NcYJPI+XQbEUpl9--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Mar 2023 22:40:51 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 07 17:40:51 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47372 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pZfzH-0000QN-1x for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 17:40:51 -0500 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:38363) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <leo@HIDDEN>) id 1pZfzF-0000QB-FS for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 17:40:49 -0500 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 622265C00D5; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 17:40:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 07 Mar 2023 17:40:44 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=mesmtp; t=1678228844; x=1678315244; bh=kQ3eh+sOjLk85SqvbitNLpmSdfRiovXbW5U7p2Q8sQ0=; b= bd3odjyhNWHr+1TXF1QnUApui1FbkaVMrWIsxGq3qXOElhNh7Ie787SV/br4bK+1 pT4KHWPV5xpsYA/Arzr4shzqfyog5Q1g0vN0YmwonyAy5eRjRJNWRU14yKV4wkgF +wN61FnSNqyfj51Qz6/Zt/Hu/UYjdlSQ2oxlEHuwf8E= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1678228844; x=1678315244; bh=kQ3eh+sOjLk85 SqvbitNLpmSdfRiovXbW5U7p2Q8sQ0=; b=fxSSJg5seYKfgZJwcAvjrvGR/hUkv 8D7cLFqoiAAtF+5Ipd0kTQ9LLx6/zDjVmmk2eC83/4d0dRaEaqJES6m5d86pPdL/ VuCvEyUVqc1Ru7fTeLx4F7Nml+yu5QTDvcLJ3LEUaqjTB9mhfa9tAUL4vMPG5DYY +jYC15hNgI3gQQPm5P88B135cytzs9tvp8dtnQVEj8oVWq5tw6eQvOl+XYafLuRU gd1R55eP+ZOvHfs/btD5pjHU5hm16xHv3ocjlPYYiXtbFOLw+mjL23afIMaJWNNy vJ7Srjxs1hkg/CJFepl+VkceEs0ouXl2QJ+3IyWfjMSZC1bNQwE22Rm6g== X-ME-Sender: <xms:a70HZLaA3a3j53EeHv-b1OHBgNqVht-Poqcz8SImYbAUjDKijUMwqg> <xme:a70HZKZtscy-43e4sqeY641oXoq8stwkrNwpsIBp0EjA_Pcnd8tfr4OR6QyFEeQaY mp5bi9at43f_amHYQ> X-ME-Received: <xmr:a70HZN8rd5Aip8W8AIh4HjMkwjJBeGSzeiN10ctIf50mB40MZPUMmZBlFzpWyoZ3mrpNou_LTbzSpTeICcMByM2G> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrvdduudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurf hrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefnvghoucfhrghm uhhlrghrihcuoehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgvqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrh hnpeeiteduheefkeeufeelgeduhfejgfelheefleeuhfeffffgueduleehvdejleeiteen ucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehlvghose hfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgv X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:bL0HZBp0n6wp6A0lPRV7jKJcv15tTcgZ5s--ps9uXJps2r7EA7xaNw> <xmx:bL0HZGqPb5I1YWGBQChbZdRlSLlX1PJnMRoPjTZjonMK7AJIhISliw> <xmx:bL0HZHTo9zYd4ugE5N8Ug4p4yhlaL3O8e057xvNN7WcPnQrfLpgL6A> <xmx:bL0HZGKtiT1HUaszOqppW2FT4wbo5J_88ujrG6ryNozRwQumt8fkJw> Feedback-ID: i819c4023:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 17:40:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 17:40:42 -0500 From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Message-ID: <ZAe9arZFiCihLH7o@HIDDEN> References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other about whether we should formalize the review process. The status quo isn't working well, so I'm in favor of trying something. On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 01:29:51PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: > I think the main problem we have is social, not organizational. There's > little incentive to jump into the laborious review process compared to > hack on something we like in our free time. We need to promote and > value review work more, without making it feel like a compulsory chore. > That's a great challenge to solve for a project that's driven by > volunteers. However, I agree with this point wholeheartedly. We really need to ask ourselves, why would anyone review patches? It's a lot of work, often thankless, and unfortunately sometimes unpleasant. > I'll venture a suggestion to explore: adding enticements to review (some > playful guidelines such as "while waiting for your 2 weeks review > period, please try to review twice as many other submissions that have > been patiently waiting on the patches tracker :-)", or some stats > crunched and advertised periodically to guix-devel or even our to our > blog about our top reviewers, etc.). In release announcements, alongside to the the normal `git shortlog` list of authors, I suggest also publicizing the list of committers: `git shortlog --numbered --summary --committer v1.4.0..HEAD` A small thing, but hopefully one of many incentives to review and commit.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Mar 2023 18:30:00 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 07 13:30:00 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47174 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pZc4W-0005rl-0u for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 13:30:00 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-f172.google.com ([209.85.160.172]:39519) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1pZc4U-0005rS-Mh for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 13:29:59 -0500 Received: by mail-qt1-f172.google.com with SMTP id w23so15410627qtn.6 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 10:29:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678213793; 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=S6UnTeIscbV8xdLPFgS7yHcXo2HDBpsdNG9uaNFvKUY=; b=pYOwC1kUDwYDXiwuO+2m4nuUdKRUnJILSnmUVTmyO/sWz3R2hVHLxMXdK5Vluw4D4o 6OMkUI0/DG6vj5Fzjy1ce7IyixBG6RkGrrevfaXq13HNtyVp6eGlaCDbL0ak1Vm/GUEh UVLOmX1Wtof0xCNoel8QXOiri5M8lwPSewyaERK8zOdWPXIB9t6/76mcgzLLUPbBTmMc vfE7ouCl4W3oa+gkXyxtu0BCqbpDiupsHCcQoudJ3mPFwI/Sq+w2t9O9+am8ncp3ZRSF gFI4wHhjqNIiMp6lWaQ0d3UFQ2xq4zbA6MDjFKAH4X69eCiu91GGmqAy1CsNJZoV8oMB xDyg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678213793; 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=S6UnTeIscbV8xdLPFgS7yHcXo2HDBpsdNG9uaNFvKUY=; b=lO83joe9C/8fBSD1qBhnHIDIb9KQupoGXSolhK+blgdTX1+Wq0vfnIiOgKbeBCn8sf DEDaaQozyoUBO7NJWwGe3HpNWE2PcJffSz7Nms4cHeZcvFC9dIBJzenYcYyWAJ0E3YAj 0FYzba0C+MKb6Bwv6IH8AIU5BDcwNFm/VIz2stYW9VgUOXGwAgEZ8xUNQnZFtyl2LxFC urq088+g1U2kNU17YmawQ9A7k8A3nbBCpnc0nDF74O5g6uT0B9wl4pusVa4PgLwPwZpS 9zgtJlyNwbREXcdKY+gbcHd99/F8KpPSvZYwMr/hqkzeXw+Lc/nNaFPyEI8z8g2JiqfD Khqw== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUBxz5Gm7DiqrW/HCwiHz1RCGWYXioY4FN/85xYykDoBEo9Lsk6 80+wBa/hf836frBUhrvRNU8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/f7msbP7FDOwxfnSJf8hZw4eOShgmD2XmzqYOpCfkrdhL+7rlYuERgl0bf6rD0AxTY895+/w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:54c:b0:3bf:d9d2:484f with SMTP id m12-20020a05622a054c00b003bfd9d2484fmr25440347qtx.11.1678213793108; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 10:29:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from hurd ([2607:fad8:4:3::1000]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q1-20020ac87341000000b003bfa2c512e6sm9936747qtp.20.2023.03.07.10.29.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 07 Mar 2023 10:29:52 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 13:29:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Tue, 07 Mar 2023 13:22:05 +0100") Message-ID: <87sfegwh28.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Simon, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: > Hi, > > On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 at 11:36, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> 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: 1. Our pool of reviewers would likely continue to be spread too thin. 2. The 2 weeks time window would quickly slip, even with a team looking at a more focused backlog, or the reviews would only be of the kind "I think that's not what we want" without more time or energy to offer the kind of concrete insights that can be turned into action for the submitter. 3. The team member might be tempted to take their chance and merge their change with little to no feedback, or feedback they perceived insufficient or not actionable enough to justify keeping their submission in limbo for longer. I think the main problem we have is social, not organizational. There's little incentive to jump into the laborious review process compared to hack on something we like in our free time. We need to promote and value review work more, without making it feel like a compulsory chore. That's a great challenge to solve for a project that's driven by volunteers. I'll venture a suggestion to explore: adding enticements to review (some playful guidelines such as "while waiting for your 2 weeks review period, please try to review twice as many other submissions that have been patiently waiting on the patches tracker :-)", or some stats crunched and advertised periodically to guix-devel or even our to our blog about our top reviewers, etc.). -- Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Mar 2023 15:22:24 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 07 10:22:24 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46956 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pZZ8y-000750-GF for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 10:22:24 -0500 Received: from sail-ipv4.us-core.com ([208.82.101.137]:54144) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <felix.lechner@HIDDEN>) id 1pZZ8w-00074r-4c for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 10:22:22 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; s=2017; bh=xxpv+kLKkEJ9+AQ 2HZ2Z8eL3ONSqw2G5EgHd0pKIU8w=; h=cc:to:subject:date:from:in-reply-to: references; d=lease-up.com; b=K09YmzLkKoYjgBu4yaHHSt75c69gIfxAMDDEt3mQ lm6myvdFzoGWM5dSkjQ+W6+R4aXeP5rcrmM+24ehqemDbvniB0rygD536zSya8tkZ3ZNwl 5diMswiMRXKTh4BDp9Yr7zjXnY/ouGw088tYaoWNTyP7o5aU+BQAbJ7HU20Yc= Received: by sail-ipv4.us-core.com (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 66780ffd (TLSv1.3:TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256:256:NO) for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 15:22:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-f169.google.com with SMTP id h3so13488570lja.12 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 07:22:19 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXD0yzdQ5cUF1X7O/MsQZnm4Fcz3bGfVnE6PyIeneTozSmdaljP xYzY9IqjVEcFZ2YC9R6hG7JPKKtEIkcb9EmdiPg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+WPNVnLUS8i49c5AxKHXD/Nafnhq0ri3TwiECO0o89dqab1DlLNQ2dgp+UjV3whm5tfa7Y35flCJxvn+yyFbo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:130d:b0:295:a3b0:6ff5 with SMTP id u13-20020a05651c130d00b00295a3b06ff5mr4446529lja.9.1678202537758; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 07:22:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> In-Reply-To: <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> From: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@HIDDEN> Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 07:21:41 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAFHYt54x+pjrOJK2nbN=4Q10n9LxGpOQfSHeBJ2onPoZrY7nsw@HIDDEN> Message-ID: <CAFHYt54x+pjrOJK2nbN=4Q10n9LxGpOQfSHeBJ2onPoZrY7nsw@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches To: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?UTF-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 2:37=E2=80=AFAM Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> wrote= : > > And the feature branches with > QA on cuirass or the Guix Build Coordinator that we talked about at the > Guix Days. For what it's worth, someone turned one of my patch sets into a proof-of-concept for feature branches. You can follow the progress via the original patch, [1] the feature branch, [2] or the resulting CI job set. [3] [1] https://issues.guix.gnu.org/61989 [2] https://qa.guix.gnu.org/issue/61989 [3] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/log/?h=3Dwip-go-updates > There are currently 48 committers, and not all of them are active. > I think this is just not enough for 20000 packages. If a brief comparison is permitted, Debian maintains 35,000 source packages with about a thousand voting members (aka Debian Developers) as well as another thousand or so contributors. My estimate is that about a third of all those people are active. On a per-package basis, that's about fifty source packages per contributor there. For Guix, I do not know how many committers are active or how many people contribute without commit privileges, but assuming two hundred active contributors altogether, I arrive at a guesstimate of about 100 packages per contributor for us. Packaging in Guix is much simpler, however, and our collective approach and care also reduce the pressure to be perfect. (In Guix, the "perfect" sentiment only survives in the formattin of commit messages.) Debian's celebrity status among software distributions also attracts a lot of people. As a side note, the growth of a group can lead to greater social tensions and a proliferation of outside politics. Given the excellent stewardship in Guix to date and the technical possibilities of automatic patch approval, I am therefore not necessarily in favor of growing the contributor base at all costs. We really have something special in Guix. Thank you all for your hard work and mutual friendship! Kind regards, Felix Lechner
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Mar 2023 13:48:00 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 07 08:48:00 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44849 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pZXfb-0003tR-Gj for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 08:48:00 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f49.google.com ([209.85.221.49]:45931) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1pZXfa-0003si-GY for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 08:47:58 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f49.google.com with SMTP id l1so12133173wry.12 for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 05:47:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678196872; 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=/uextQQaaXdn+WZVPiAvXIcAgMc29dF+qJdonPXUQ/Q=; b=Nan6qXZG08KxVby+6Fu4lzogOwbXgUqOgOkp0Q2dOBw7bAxpgMj14DO+oEhn4kbmSm 4XA41/NN0xcax/0Srfj5om8FtMbwYUNrIIxzVN4ywmkZ4qlN+KCsZq3x4nmLF6qvA1is MDf0b2iK5Yg5J/an0JfUGidsZR/xfzYCuWfVzOYbrC/pm/keDRGFK80TpDVP/YB5iAA+ 83YMKNtYSYahNNJ8DCxXprJRgIF3b4TgPbnVJPAjDR60OVMZPx+HKSTTpNu5zADKOnnt RGOutNmZN9u3FgBmwKOc5o+mgCD/zLVydNnbsxO+NbqsIch3mvGf+OC22rblE7aapVim Ro1A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678196872; 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=/uextQQaaXdn+WZVPiAvXIcAgMc29dF+qJdonPXUQ/Q=; b=FgtySWP60ekgK8w0jCzi6OI1NpU8O6ZSoFywCvm8STRE8TWBw1ht3SGtdkYMgJUsuK q9OGSi/pd1+hOF2BkxRuUk2bAFKG3BU6J/WbQaxrurzja26Q2Ifl0yRJb5vRuMfNT2K9 +Efrfv6DeKdqJ9KYAnZqgHReiEwaPwyk9uky0dzUVfMQ4gGHGcCOZvLLRridNrh/VNWS nO8wbErm938948oYKoE8YUKgoyMKCa85kic0bMGweicqCZUNZJPPBfVVAgwUEOpTJLvT UVwBovlGXclWQ4v5VVil753pK3+XAyolD6jAEB8vvLfxT5MrfVYNdRzn5AxizPNwaKur XNdA== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUbwHDrttJBCtwP7pnGI4+ztXbSK3JpS2f3G3eLsQZ7Z0Bxtq8x Y3aQhwR63n6kVQj5ru+Q/n4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+ktakRzwcdlCxXZBvXQp5AwWriDW+Tp/v3Y7X76C+e4AFuvCVKhxJeCtdNaJao7Kud5Cqajw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:11c7:b0:2c7:b49:97f6 with SMTP id i7-20020a05600011c700b002c70b4997f6mr7780830wrx.2.1678196872569; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 05:47:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:65d2:2476:f637:db1e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s4-20020adff804000000b002c705058773sm13169124wrp.74.2023.03.07.05.47.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 07 Mar 2023 05:47:52 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches In-Reply-To: <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 13:22:05 +0100 Message-ID: <861qm0da4y.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 at 11:36, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> 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 vacati= on > 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. :-) Somehow, we have a bootstrap problem =E2=80=93 bootstrap is everywhere. ;-) From my understanding, Ludo=E2=80=99s proposal is about some structure of h= ow =E2=80=9Cteams=E2=80=9C would work and that structure would help in constit= uting =E2=80=9Cteams=E2=80=9D. One way for bootstrapping. From my understanding, the other approach somehow proposed between the lines in this thread would be to first constitute =E2=80=9Cteams=E2=80=9D a= nd then document how they work. The other way for bootstrapping. While I am not convinced by Ludo=E2=80=99s patch, I think the approach to document first how we would like the =E2=80=9Cteams=E2=80=9D would work is = better for bootstrapping them. Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Mar 2023 10:37:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 07 05:37:02 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44572 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pZUgo-0004k1-3K for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 05:37:02 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:58172) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <andreas@HIDDEN>) id 1pZUgm-0004jX-9A for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Mar 2023 05:37:00 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08A63193E; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 11:36:54 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at hera.aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WUacxmylU4zX; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 11:36:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from jurong (unknown [IPv6:2001:861:c4:f2f0::c64]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 415E6569; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 11:36:53 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 11:36:51 +0100 From: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> To: =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Message-ID: <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong> References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?iso-8859-15?Q?Court=E8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, Am Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 09:53:29AM +0800 schrieb 宋文武: > I usually push patches for others who don't have commit access, while > most packages don't have a team at all, and some with me as the only > team member. > Should I wait for another commiter's approvol under this new policy or > can I push "random packages" (eg: jwm) solo under the status quo? For > packages I as the only team member (eg: fcitx), should I looking for > another commiter for other's patches and my patches? under the current policy, what you do is fine and very welcome. Under the new policy, it would not be (if I remember correctly, there is a one week waiting policy, after which one could push nevertheless). So while the idea is good in principle, I think we would have to make sure that first: 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. And I also think we then need 3) more tooling; maybe a mailing list for each team? A file that contains the link between source code files and teams, and a script around "git send-email" that automatically puts into cc the corresponding team when submitting a patch? And the feature branches with QA on cuirass or the Guix Build Coordinator that we talked about at the Guix Days. I think our main problem right now is lack of committers and/or contributors. While looking at core-updates, I was surprised how outdated some of our packages are (around Qt, KDE and Python, for instance; I suppose it depends a lot on the field), in particular for a rolling release distro. (For Qt@5, we were at a release from June 2022, and there had been more recent releases in September, October and January; it would be nice to have a working team preparing a feature branch in a timely fashion after each release.) There are currently 48 committers, and not all of them are active. I think this is just not enough for 20000 packages. Andreas
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Mar 2023 01:53:23 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Mar 06 20:53:23 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44085 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1pZMW2-0007gD-SR
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 20:53:23 -0500
Received: from mail.envs.net ([5.199.136.28]:52284)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <iyzsong@HIDDEN>) id 1pZMW0-0007g4-5i
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 20:53:21 -0500
Received: from localhost (mail.envs.net [127.0.0.1])
by mail.envs.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E506638A0876;
Tue, 7 Mar 2023 01:53:17 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=envs.net; s=modoboa;
t=1678153997; bh=2GAWOIiRfTd7juQY8tm6DlYMsN5MUD2CJLf6YFNXbWw=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From;
b=XTVjhNjUqKrGny5UNhGz2feCEvDwR4Jca5y07YDO+Qcpxw74DCs/k4k7zewoG1Gb9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X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.envs.net
Received: from mail.envs.net ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (mail.envs.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026)
with ESMTP id Qp51V3LlTx49; Tue, 7 Mar 2023 01:53:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (unknown [182.150.116.135])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest
SHA256) (No client certificate requested)
by mail.envs.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA;
Tue, 7 Mar 2023 01:53:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [local])
by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 5fe60a11;
Tue, 7 Mar 2023 01:53:29 +0000 (UTC)
From: =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 09:53:29 +0800
In-Reply-To: <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=
=?utf-8?Q?=22's?= message of "Wed, 01 Mar 2023 23:45:27 +0100")
Message-ID: <87y1o9mina.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
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-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>,
61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN> skribis:
>
>> Regarding this change specifically though, I'm unclear how it would
>> impact the things I push for others. I pushed some patches today, would
>> this mean that I'd have to look at what team/teams are involved
>> (according to /etc/teams.scm.in) for each commit/series, and then either
>> continue if I'm a member of that team, or skip it if I'm not?
>>
>> If I'm going to not be pushing stuff I would have previously pushed
>> because I'm not in the relevant teams, maybe I should just add myself to
>> every team? I guess this is not a serious question, but I'm more making
>> the point that if teams become a formal part of patch review, then some
>> formalities over membership of a team is probably a prerequsite.
>>
> [...]
>
> Good questions.
>
> For teams like =E2=80=98core=E2=80=99 or =E2=80=98home=E2=80=99, there sh=
ould be no overlap, so it=E2=80=99s
> quite easy to see who=E2=80=99s in charge.
> [...]
> For =E2=80=9Crandom packages=E2=80=9D, I=E2=80=99m fine with the status q=
uo.
Hello, I'd like to know if I'm working fine according to the status
quo..
I usually push patches for others who don't have commit access, while
most packages don't have a team at all, and some with me as the only
team member.
Should I wait for another commiter's approvol under this new policy or
can I push "random packages" (eg: jwm) solo under the status quo? For
packages I as the only team member (eg: fcitx), should I looking for
another commiter for other's patches and my patches?
Thank you!
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Mar 2023 21:42:44 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Mar 06 16:42:44 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43866 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pZIbU-0004rn-CU for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 16:42:44 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:33262) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pZIbS-0004rb-7b for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 16:42:42 -0500 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 <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pZIbJ-00036V-Eu; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 16:42:34 -0500 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=DwiPE54c/yOMS32+f3qImf00Fybx5IuKxyc+EKe6rfs=; b=PDZBxNTtgZvGWx586CQA ITi8d5EtT/PvJh7jnYoyKVJT5fNS7AFuPog7bGJm10zVSpPPqfC71WJ4zyZ6sH5zPiwbiDAQ6iHAa oKxsPo3QQtsO2f1+pVaX5KwwCkUxMa4jbclzFjc9EM4N16qF5GAQ4vrohL6RkuDxJFE/wF9/qhUeF 9t8EnNdhAq5kytSXBQVCr/bo/0NGi84DIx37YKveAptFwdMw25BP9emy3a75hsXWwP6DjCGH4Ngie geNsDEJnu42H211imVmUgs01De6YjitHIl4qx8gqwj4w5M4HevmFHto7zYfrDkGdJqkSak6iaaCbe EWFbiIpXdLqubQ==; 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 <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pZIbI-00022O-2i; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 16:42:32 -0500 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <87h6ux285h.fsf@HIDDEN> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Sextidi 16 =?utf-8?Q?Vent=C3=B4se?= an 231 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour de =?utf-8?Q?l'=C3=89pinard?= 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: Mon, 06 Mar 2023 22:42:29 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87h6ux285h.fsf@HIDDEN> (Maxim Cournoyer's message of "Mon, 06 Mar 2023 10:48:10 -0500") Message-ID: <87edq14kvu.fsf@HIDDEN> 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-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> skribis: > It sounds reasonable and a good change "on paper", but in practice I > think it may be too soon to formalize teams that way. Teams are a > nascent concept which hasn't reached a point we can rely on it, in my > opinion. We are still ironing out kinks in the tools [0] :-). I'd > prefer we stay as nimble/agile as we can and maximize the potential of > our large committers pool for now, at the expense of sometimes having to > retroactively discussing/fixing up or reverting some change that wasn't > up to par, that could have possibly been caught by a more focused team. I think formalizing collaboration would be the way to =E2=80=9Cmaximize the potential of our large committer pool=E2=80=9D: by having clear rules, we m= ake it easier to work together, not harder. Retroactively fixing, reverting, or discussing often causes unnecessary friction and puts pressure on the collective. Discussion should always happen before the fact. We=E2=80=99ve reached the point where the code base is large and the experi= ences of individual contributors vary. To cope with that, I think we need to communicate and coordinate more to have a shared understanding of the code, of our goals, of our needs and expectations. We can no longer rely on implicitness and the idea that silence is consent. This proposal is one possible step in that direction, but I=E2=80=99m open = to other approaches. Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Mar 2023 15:48:20 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Mar 06 10:48:20 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43386 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1pZD4V-00044j-LP
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 10:48:20 -0500
Received: from mail-qt1-f178.google.com ([209.85.160.178]:42530)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1pZD4T-00043q-8t
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 10:48:17 -0500
Received: by mail-qt1-f178.google.com with SMTP id r16so9357203qtx.9
for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 06 Mar 2023 07:48:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678117691;
h=content-transfer-encoding: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=EWjK/ji4NdizPMEp6fIRCOoqH+FTcAithgn2iNVyW2Y=;
b=IoPEGZuqp4/uSy6k2Y5YJJ5/fnqlOOBGJHsvGCnbLDVP/08PkVPuRsQ68dH70Na5ly
CoKC8vXsf6c+Vl7gXaB7J2mif6fko6iEilzSwp+bmQrcywnjXsp24N1VI1GqIOtYA/Ei
lcBeKKc4ZS/87wDtBaxAIdOLzoHtW7rg+BNloChFBrqdsGcx1Q7zd3g++1DuCHYiQa2e
fiBhnfHSwCacGpw9WIGVwPI//eqkRSP93rssP9XT0gPvBZkviro9xOBHPocPIAPTN5wD
pBCtmyvVVs7FEtiBpLrb3uUQvMKjCjhZVIcqwN9zITDMGznC8OKr/rZqlYRDiSCQxN1H
b4Tg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678117691;
h=content-transfer-encoding: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=EWjK/ji4NdizPMEp6fIRCOoqH+FTcAithgn2iNVyW2Y=;
b=c4JgFB6g83FkXnVX2dhQZ5RKUW2Xd4OuZ6Xw0d6L1z7S4liSUtW+nyqvxN1T16SVUC
ICGK/n7NK5yIBnQvop86zv0xStEWA3z5TfUCVOAZ+C+VfVnd6hn5whfm1tSSpSsIisqZ
0xQR2ypX/7e+e6Voz284SGHTNUUpgyubFXsq8IbR2hDhbCYs13vfk6qTSehTIrDo2UNV
GDLmqA4AP8MEJmj9qrVK+JlAiI0cTFrY7n6Q+k/maD+IrUlX3Q77S1HmdtbIlTobGCuJ
FndIsEtTJVDoLwNYFvst2A5V/dkD0jxY9T40aS8spzkVEIe9OoHyqoXBwy2JLaJWWHJn
ohmA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWGrkRtlbJNHQkvicWEybLu74lk9uabVA3cl1UbzypdeubgsPrM
F3u8POVWW47EFfhjy8Z9yOQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9+a/ipoMSIdte3TZ5oLYo4rbeq8/XamUgLz6z9vxT4VcQzHTkxcl5nB02IYoYUAJ5Aelvvig==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5f92:0:b0:3bd:1728:8886 with SMTP id
j18-20020ac85f92000000b003bd17288886mr17229999qta.9.1678117691568;
Mon, 06 Mar 2023 07:48:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hurd (dsl-149-144.b2b2c.ca. [66.158.149.144])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
j11-20020a05622a038b00b003bd0f0b26b0sm7925021qtx.77.2023.03.06.07.48.10
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Mon, 06 Mar 2023 07:48:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2023 10:48:10 -0500
In-Reply-To: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22?=
=?utf-8?Q?'s?= message of "Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:13:28 +0100")
Message-ID: <87h6ux285h.fsf@HIDDEN>
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-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
guix-maintainers@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Hi Ludovic,
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes:
> Hello Guix!
>
> The project has been steadily gaining new contributors, which is great,
> and I think we need to adjust our processes accordingly.
>
> Currently teams are described mostly as pools of people who can mentor
> contributors in a particular area and who can review patches in that
> area. My proposal is to give teams formal approval power over changes
> to code in their area.
>
> This is sorta happening already, but informally: if a non-committer
> sends a patch, someone from the team eventually =E2=80=9Capproves=E2=80=
=9D it by pushing
> it. Within a team, the situation is different: people usually discuss
> changes, and the submitter (also committer) eventually pushes them;
> sometimes, the submitter pushes changes without getting approval (or
> feedback) from others on the team.
>
> With the proposed policy, members of a team would also have to review
> and approve each other=E2=80=99s work. Formal approval means getting an
> explicit =E2=80=9CLGTM=E2=80=9D (or similar) from at least one other team=
member.
>
> This is similar to the review thresholds found on GitLab & co., where
> project admins can specify a minimum number of approvals required before
> a change is marked as ready. I think it avoids the unavoidable
> misunderstandings that can arise in a growing group and help pacify
> day-to-day collaboration.
>
> Below is a suggested change.
>
> What do people think?
>
> Ludo=E2=80=99.
It sounds reasonable and a good change "on paper", but in practice I
think it may be too soon to formalize teams that way. Teams are a
nascent concept which hasn't reached a point we can rely on it, in my
opinion. We are still ironing out kinks in the tools [0] :-). I'd
prefer we stay as nimble/agile as we can and maximize the potential of
our large committers pool for now, at the expense of sometimes having to
retroactively discussing/fixing up or reverting some change that wasn't
up to par, that could have possibly been caught by a more focused team.
[0] https://issues.guix.gnu.org/58813
--=20
Thanks,
Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Mar 2023 01:08:15 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 02 20:08:15 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59300 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pXtuB-0000OV-H4 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2023 20:08:15 -0500 Received: from mail.envs.net ([5.199.136.28]:48124) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <iyzsong@HIDDEN>) id 1pXtu8-0000OM-Vu for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2023 20:08:14 -0500 Received: from localhost (mail.envs.net [127.0.0.1]) by mail.envs.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61DBF38A0036; Fri, 3 Mar 2023 01:08:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=envs.net; s=modoboa; t=1677805691; bh=Sc18dOw9CGT30MxggVeNR0EBU3t9U1wwBq5AycqyGYA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=PHQ31tzM6Dw/lsGYCs1xXoY/a3P9o+RX+SwN64CcnruzQHitXuzu/diINTXtwf7/3 gyc58rbQ6fx4Uzdrf/wm4CJtdUKUtG5fgaFJ6Gf9NA9BeHQ7XN7kkcS2wrtZRgL/8N sdyoaC8PShFIMaW+6Wy6OLMILV64liuMmHc0f6a8NmLKxmpCwoI4GQbNprZ5RrZYZ+ 6JI1415MDp5AOw2YODTXnM7Eyx4tQJnq7zUdRdjrA9EH8vSlTLMKM+zApuCTjQFyKw EjIhBdI3oQjEVbHr6w2nfGU8GqCmu947yDIcq+efeekRgb9i9XDIA/R4VRS54mmN5X 8GAWBvmJ1GvK0AO9awXQPTzcrG881R1ZFQvFKLoxmfTa6xTEhI2EhoqXWJyVKfAh0K LI42se4ZTNZ4rJry0uw/DV/1d/N5Li3WNLT6HE2op/JI73RvGv2vtVBbIIvC+KdJQa F2h5smVZEiECv3qw2DA5dtJqKCidx0AYuFZo6cC5Hy++CVH4Z9ifElCASQd5xi/1U3 bcX/mqdbg1uAN8OJ0xcuPgB8Y1bRLFO7Dnn4UcEXVoXgIpW9WLNaALnkV8dO+JmH0l 0dqYhIWH6qgQCbt3TR1aaygS0XQAJ1atA6N41IqIjH5IjfnjIGVkxok7gem2oyVsLp tdL5j3N/Aq5JeoE9cZpfC2LM= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.envs.net Received: from mail.envs.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.envs.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id QOrQmd5Vml5e; Fri, 3 Mar 2023 01:08:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [182.150.116.135]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.envs.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Fri, 3 Mar 2023 01:08:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [local]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id e166d020; Fri, 3 Mar 2023 01:08:17 +0000 (UTC) From: =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN> To: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZACCzGx70IiN3eIc@jurong> Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2023 09:08:17 +0800 In-Reply-To: <ZACCzGx70IiN3eIc@jurong> (Andreas Enge's message of "Thu, 2 Mar 2023 12:04:44 +0100") Message-ID: <87jzzywsji.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> writes: > Hello, > > in the current situation I think the suggestion is putting the horse before > the cart. In a first step before adding policy, we should make the teams > functional. I find debian have various teams, and each team has a page for packages status: https://tracker.debian.org/teams/debian-multimedia/ If we want more functional/formol teams, I think we need more tools like this.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Mar 2023 13:58:23 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 02 08:58:23 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56206 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1pXjRv-0005ER-4d
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2023 08:58:23 -0500
Received: from mailout.easymail.ca ([64.68.200.34]:38638)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <bokr@HIDDEN>) id 1pXjRt-0005EE-Hp
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2023 08:58:21 -0500
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mailout.easymail.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B937E8DB5;
Thu, 2 Mar 2023 13:58:16 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=bokr.com; s=easymail;
t=1677765496; bh=Na61KvLxJIP/7rUTskXlOeM09/I5+d5Ba8lDyMCGSxM=;
h=From:Date:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From;
b=ZkfOnouvtXRDMmQPCGHArTn49rIT/FdXb1zE4mKd800ZChz6BXHTzwlT35tqNU729
kA76d8GxK1RpY13kkAQMrmxLKLgzurMyjCXZRUlsnmI/7RgHLlJciAG38gKH/hz6Aj
61QZ0uKo9LVNwTc3voXR1At8ngT3O4U+hAxwNJKEbESpIaRQ6IfCwgf3lht1OBqZo7
H+qiGeHar9pxJ0bMPNXUZm12iEQGbPfkkokQDaP/K37wiZZtte3bFZBrQw8nnPw4FY
nCkikGLwhimkV5fMjn4jqUMOIPMhC1KCrtJiO9e7fOiNbAaZKSFxdOlSBZc1lTvMQd
OqDmJYjli+mbg==
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at emo08-pco.easydns.vpn
Received: from mailout.easymail.ca ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (emo08-pco.easydns.vpn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id YuxzzJdrCss9; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 13:58:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (m5-242-216-138.cust.tele2.se [5.242.216.138])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest
SHA256) (No client certificate requested)
by mailout.easymail.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3FEDBE8D46;
Thu, 2 Mar 2023 13:58:15 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=bokr.com; s=easymail;
t=1677765495; bh=Na61KvLxJIP/7rUTskXlOeM09/I5+d5Ba8lDyMCGSxM=;
h=From:Date:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From;
b=GB650EfSYFjOE7w08H+oSF0oYlSbA3k8Hwpn2UB8Hiw/NlFy7S7iaRxJ3hFwF04yS
m0LQXDb3Psav/SEI5EXorAqSoanUmHGIf/amRWLvF+obxDCi4F4NrKZyeyI+4IFVxi
E0mk9u3z+wqZDwm2f4oxzyI+lMn83OaOKxElKAan/+SRsIaC4L31i1HbT16vyCMLXJ
DhQfPwMgfdI1Dyzfw8yWdd2H3oKBsiP6PvM4DqcLkgiBXmKfzXeNIei7XseDZ72qaI
mp/3ZHAeaXcx5oVWeTJx5/ICJPDP8YwdljkT+wE+PDDG5W82Z9VcskihRCYj7Wk9Wn
FMYXystGtlZHg==
From: bokr@HIDDEN
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 14:57:58 +0100
To: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
Message-ID: <20230302135758.GA40729@LionPure>
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ZACCzGx70IiN3eIc@jurong>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZACCzGx70IiN3eIc@jurong>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
guix-maintainers@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: bokr@HIDDEN
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
Hi,
tl;dr:
If you want to expand the list of committers rapidly,
would it make sense to have a sand-box repo for new committers
which trusted committers could channel cherry-picks from?
Pick your bugaboo, but I consider plausible that some
volunteering committers are there on paid job assignment
serving some agenda which you can't easily discover.
Well, that can be good and normal with FLOSS-enlightened emplayers,
but one can imagine not-so-benevolent assignments...
(pick your concept of benevolence :)
On +2023-03-02 12:04:44 +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in the current situation I think the suggestion is putting the horse before
> the cart. In a first step before adding policy, we should make the teams
> functional. While working on core-updates, I have been realising we are
> already spread too thin: Some important languages have teams with one or
> two members, who would effectively become bottlenecks. Other software has
> no team (Qt/KDE). All in all, I also think we have too few committers.
> Adding policy might completely stall the project...
>
> If for every trivial update of a Python package we need not only submit a
> patch to the bugtracker, wait for QA, get back to the patch, resign it,
> push it and close the bug, but additionally wait for one of the two Python
> team members to have a look at it (or let an additional week pass),
> incentives to participate will tend to zero.
>
> Your suggested policy can help against commits of too bad quality; but I
> do not think this is our problem, our problem is rather a lack of fast
> progress.
>
> So I think we need to add committers, add committers to teams, encourage
> teams to engage in work, and if everything works smoothly, maybe add policy.
>
> Andreas
>
>
--
Regards,
Bengt Richter
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Mar 2023 11:04:55 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Mar 02 06:04:55 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55958 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pXgk3-0001mZ-5g for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2023 06:04:55 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:52302) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <andreas@HIDDEN>) id 1pXgk1-0001mJ-7Y for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2023 06:04:53 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0BFD198F; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 12:04:46 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at hera.aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id df4JXLlNLSAD; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 12:04:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from jurong (unknown [147.94.72.84]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53C65694; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 12:04:46 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 12:04:44 +0100 From: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> To: Ludovic =?iso-8859-15?Q?Court=E8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Message-ID: <ZACCzGx70IiN3eIc@jurong> References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, in the current situation I think the suggestion is putting the horse before the cart. In a first step before adding policy, we should make the teams functional. While working on core-updates, I have been realising we are already spread too thin: Some important languages have teams with one or two members, who would effectively become bottlenecks. Other software has no team (Qt/KDE). All in all, I also think we have too few committers. Adding policy might completely stall the project... If for every trivial update of a Python package we need not only submit a patch to the bugtracker, wait for QA, get back to the patch, resign it, push it and close the bug, but additionally wait for one of the two Python team members to have a look at it (or let an additional week pass), incentives to participate will tend to zero. Your suggested policy can help against commits of too bad quality; but I do not think this is our problem, our problem is rather a lack of fast progress. So I think we need to add committers, add committers to teams, encourage teams to engage in work, and if everything works smoothly, maybe add policy. Andreas
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Mar 2023 00:34:20 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 01 19:34:20 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55291 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1pXWto-00009U-7N
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 19:34:20 -0500
Received: from sail-ipv4.us-core.com ([208.82.101.137]:47390)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <felix.lechner@HIDDEN>) id 1pXWtm-00009K-7W
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 19:34:19 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; s=2017; bh=3f9VJWI/f7klsOp
bn2ZZhpIDi3kEOmDYZJAPs6yY1ik=;
h=cc:to:subject:date:from:in-reply-to:
references; d=lease-up.com; b=qhR9neG95hl69BmYXnkO3PhbrGgFaYse2ZkGwQYk
Qap58YEPGz+oybxEBcvaVw0YZZaEhpkBqYvbTblhaLT3Pwj7xd15c6ksZA+lZ17FE28Xq8
zki/2XcA0naQ1wjbnqVmFTyJWj2Gns+F/xLT3e/SvUS5G+8JGnBCd2HvF1cJY=
Received: by sail-ipv4.us-core.com (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id f93056af
(TLSv1.3:TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256:256:NO)
for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 00:34:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lf1-f49.google.com with SMTP id j11so4322168lfg.13
for <61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 16:34:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKV6lNQXZIIpig+s9gGONjcqFw+rv/GC/Cyl88K6fwsULKVgtx/H
DArItE0TK1K+iazgx6vXvln9jLERQtO4wcntP3k=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/7LCWHjsCEQRJE+4rnD5Iz1EsiPOS92dTz3tVWIEFU6zyAZu7LpYO/za+AtGe4p8l5B5OAbrp8Z71oN2Isx+Y=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:48af:0:b0:4db:3ab2:896e with SMTP id
u15-20020ac248af000000b004db3ab2896emr2198704lfg.6.1677698549463; Wed, 01 Mar
2023 11:22:29 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 11:21:53 -0800
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAFHYt57k-sTofs7qnhZHhc4K3N4o_T99r=QnsvaHk9upKe2yYg@HIDDEN>
Message-ID: <CAFHYt57k-sTofs7qnhZHhc4K3N4o_T99r=QnsvaHk9upKe2yYg@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
To: Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 1.1 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: Hi, On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 9:31 AM Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>
wrote: > > I'm unclear how it would > impact the things I push for others.
I pushed some patches today, would > this mean that I' [...]
Content analysis details: (1.1 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 Date: is 3 to 6 hours before Received: date
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 9:31=E2=80=AFAM Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN=
> wrote:
>
> I'm unclear how it would
> impact the things I push for others. I pushed some patches today, would
> this mean that I'd have to look at what team/teams are involved
> (according to /etc/teams.scm.in) for each commit/series, and then either
> continue if I'm a member of that team, or skip it if I'm not?
Perhaps a compromise would be to ask committers to get a second
opinion from another committer whenever they feel it is necessary.
A committer who is confident enough, however, would be encouraged to
sidestep the restriction.
This guidance would gently bump the perceived penalty for a misstep,
because ignorance was then part of the mix when an error occurred.
The second person will often be from an affected team, but sometimes
they won't. That would only need to be revisited when there was a
problem. Otherwise, it was water under the bridge.
A softer guidance would also allow the project to experiment gradually
with greater checks and balances.
After some time, the committers would be able to weigh=E2=80=94both
individually as well as collectively=E2=80=94whether the additional rules
actually provided the benefits they were designed to produce.
Kind regards
Felix Lechner
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Mar 2023 22:45:44 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 01 17:45:44 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55218 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1pXVCi-0003EC-6z
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:45:44 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51724)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pXVCf-0003Dr-Kv
for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:45:42 -0500
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 <ludo@HIDDEN>)
id 1pXVCX-00083n-6D; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:45:33 -0500
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=BaepkHl5Pm+YpgJ5IOukomqJp/eZUFLMQYkAbbsa4+U=; b=FJQZYCtm8w2Lnl8Hb3eC
KvN9Bu8hVprw4x8iza9mGwhSY5oT3ZEYoXilROn5HMPzbs+mlPLoBvVmTn/CR+s/LugLGYEQYSxR5
p/mqoyld/I5IoLIOZF2urqmtQtJBQxl/XkmXLYfN57AO7pJyHGwhzqQmD1CRFSaCBeiboPBUgua66
AKkgNeGcccLwTGdDD0aDes8b+ESfulyXYcxwZECjjgNvbnr3PtQpNOytdZUmmgWjiDb8WmqlKIuT8
DN0+krMg33mO7ZYGZveoNfF2xRdCwIyIJv45SAvmH6RRk9kQ2jLVwx2RulDSYIT/eAq1WstWY2BIW
WSrndT+AWHbovw==;
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 <ludo@HIDDEN>)
id 1pXVCU-0000cb-1D; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:45:31 -0500
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2023 23:45:27 +0100
In-Reply-To: <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> (Christopher Baines's message of
"Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:15:26 +0000")
Message-ID: <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
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-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894
Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
Hi Chris,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN> skribis:
> I guess I'm still a team sceptic, I think the idea is interesting and I
> have added myself as a member of some teams. But the main impact on me
> so far is that I've just been getting some unwanted personal email,
> messages that previously wouldn't have landed in my inbox have been
> doing so.
Same for me (took me a while to understand why I was suddenly Cc=E2=80=99d =
on
some many patches. :-)) I=E2=80=99m not sure how to improve on that.
> Regarding this change specifically though, I'm unclear how it would
> impact the things I push for others. I pushed some patches today, would
> this mean that I'd have to look at what team/teams are involved
> (according to /etc/teams.scm.in) for each commit/series, and then either
> continue if I'm a member of that team, or skip it if I'm not?
>
> If I'm going to not be pushing stuff I would have previously pushed
> because I'm not in the relevant teams, maybe I should just add myself to
> every team? I guess this is not a serious question, but I'm more making
> the point that if teams become a formal part of patch review, then some
> formalities over membership of a team is probably a prerequsite.
>
> As a point of clarification, if a patch or series touches files that
> fall within the scope of several teams, am I correct in saying that this
> change would require approval from all teams?
Good questions.
For teams like =E2=80=98core=E2=80=99 or =E2=80=98home=E2=80=99, there shou=
ld be no overlap, so it=E2=80=99s
quite easy to see who=E2=80=99s in charge.
Teams related to packages are more likely to overlap, and it=E2=80=99s also=
an
area where we generally want more flexibility. The example you
give=E2=80=94pushing patches even though you=E2=80=99re not on the correspo=
nding
team(s)=E2=80=94is something we=E2=80=99d still want to allow most of the t=
ime.
There seems to be different requirements depending on teams. I=E2=80=99d l=
ike
more coordination and clearer responsibilities for subsystems (guix/*,
gnu/{services,system,build}/*, etc.) and key packages/tools (Python,
ocaml-build-system, etc.). For =E2=80=9Crandom packages=E2=80=9D, I=E2=80=
=99m fine with the
status quo.
WDYT?
Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Mar 2023 18:21:08 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 01 13:21:08 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54885 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pXR4e-0004Mz-AB for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 13:21:08 -0500 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([212.71.252.8]:42332) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <mail@HIDDEN>) id 1pXR4c-0004Mr-EO for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 13:21:07 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:68c1:0:3a91:a0a4:ecee:f157]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 02247169F0; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 18:21:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from felis (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 3e2578d0; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 18:21:04 +0000 (UTC) References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> <20230301185919.56734797@tangletp> User-agent: mu4e 1.8.13; emacs 28.2 From: Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN> To: =?utf-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_H=C3=B6fling?= <bjoern.hoefling@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2023 18:17:31 +0000 In-reply-to: <20230301185919.56734797@tangletp> Message-ID: <87sfeouycy.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bj=C3=B6rn H=C3=B6fling <bjoern.hoefling@HIDDEN> writes: > On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:15:26 +0000 > Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN> wrote: > >> I guess I'm still a team sceptic, I think the idea is interesting and >> I have added myself as a member of some teams. But the main impact on >> me so far is that I've just been getting some unwanted personal email, >> messages that previously wouldn't have landed in my inbox have been >> doing so. >> >> Regarding this change specifically though, I'm unclear how it would >> impact the things I push for others. I pushed some patches today, >> would this mean that I'd have to look at what team/teams are involved >> (according to /etc/teams.scm.in) for each commit/series, and then >> either continue if I'm a member of that team, or skip it if I'm not? > > I'm on Chris' side. We need less burden to review/push, instead of more > formal rules/obligations. Identifying when you share someone's views in a discussion can be helpful, but I don't see how taking sides is, we should all be on the same side. Even if this is what you meant, trying to frame things constructively is always helpful. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmP/l41fFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9Xd8RQ/+NuyJARDsK9PljBL2Vkb2wm/wUHX2mIHq 90wAHXl7nakdiYMOKY07YFkYgwjKUQMMJFlUJYRZTC+vNWHNnZ3Z5iypzYjqpp0F BTuQt7MxFpIkk8silzFVZmVbfrKVV4BNxno9WnxVAm+7yS0Mx16Piyqz+VLlwfup 1T1HMwpyT4+m5PcHrAza9+likzWkdCbDCUDhtMfRbHlBOQDV5ezetaAmE5XIrtUG /sVnUvGR6SCmJs5zPuwqMYJhAsG/dAccXiqJyjFCWaX6iarn1vGmwFiX1rbLVRoV FONmHkW4lnx3s6hq/jWzVDrZuU7PJ1Nh3McN4Pk4vpQBp0UWR/MV1R0m0MxPNw49 JjJpPlxxxcJFEu8hqU5KXculGJSk+u3bE2LwLapc/Ey/uhAPZyByyXlXA4BSfzKD nCa/fvj50oK4YcDj0zBtP94AydmArS3Gztx8INHISg5VJi0ierQrYZG7U1VCJdNV ykcZ/e3OjP6NkdL+yA4F6dl6wVp0N97Rxf5V6ubxnzkJ5flQ5XIv8LJ/OF9h7pAr TRHaG+/SwcbGNwMy4peZX1f5EZPmNH0XWWldVdcgcM9hBNbbyGpNkOl0zvVmwUhL PBj+ZaHxUItHfWMqKa+tCmgOwMqvsepj9lCYavjAlhbC8jjiSW/qiShZPjYvVbEA OJwm90wKnnQ= =19hs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Mar 2023 17:59:34 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 01 12:59:34 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54862 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pXQjl-0003oM-Vg for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 12:59:34 -0500 Received: from m4s11.vlinux.de ([83.151.27.109]:43778 helo=bjoernhoefling.de) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <bjoern.hoefling@HIDDEN>) id 1pXQjk-0003oB-M2 for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 12:59:33 -0500 Received: from tangletp (p57b52280.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.181.34.128]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bjoernhoefling.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A1A2F3F954; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 18:59:30 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 18:59:19 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?QmrDtnJuIEjDtmZsaW5n?= <bjoern.hoefling@HIDDEN> To: Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Message-ID: <20230301185919.56734797@tangletp> In-Reply-To: <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.0.0 (GTK+ 3.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/Jh_7Q7p/Q51whQ=.LvEo4KA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?UTF-8?B?Q291cnTDqHM=?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --Sig_/Jh_7Q7p/Q51whQ=.LvEo4KA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:15:26 +0000 Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN> wrote: =20 > I guess I'm still a team sceptic, I think the idea is interesting and > I have added myself as a member of some teams. But the main impact on > me so far is that I've just been getting some unwanted personal email, > messages that previously wouldn't have landed in my inbox have been > doing so. >=20 > Regarding this change specifically though, I'm unclear how it would > impact the things I push for others. I pushed some patches today, > would this mean that I'd have to look at what team/teams are involved > (according to /etc/teams.scm.in) for each commit/series, and then > either continue if I'm a member of that team, or skip it if I'm not? I'm on Chris' side. We need less burden to review/push, instead of more formal rules/obligations. Speaking about me, I'm in the Java team, where my knowledge is best, but in the past I also "wildered" in the Python and Ruby areas. I think I always tried to be cautious with my reviews though: If I saw it was just a simple version update with no dependency changes, and it builds/runs afterwards, I gave an OK and/or pushed it, although I'm not the super-expert. If it was too hot for me, I left my fingers from it or asked a known expert for help. "Teams" are a nice hint (for example, adding a tag to the bug entry), but I wouldn't make it too formal. Bj=C3=B6rn --Sig_/Jh_7Q7p/Q51whQ=.LvEo4KA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EAREKAB0WIQQiGUP0np8nb5SZM4K/KGy2WT5f/QUCY/+SdwAKCRC/KGy2WT5f /YynAJsFcbXGwU1iAZ+ptVtyZjOKUDeItACeNGlD6pGb1SoIuqCEIKsrm5veS0A= =n2hT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Jh_7Q7p/Q51whQ=.LvEo4KA--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 61894) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Mar 2023 17:31:20 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 01 12:31:20 2023 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54813 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1pXQIR-00033Z-Mb for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 12:31:20 -0500 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([212.71.252.8]:42330) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <mail@HIDDEN>) id 1pXQIQ-00033R-5M for 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 12:31:18 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:68c1:0:3a91:a0a4:ecee:f157]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2BEF816C38; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:31:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from felis (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id b6931dec; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 17:31:16 +0000 (UTC) References: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> User-agent: mu4e 1.8.13; emacs 28.2 From: Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN> To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:15:26 +0000 In-reply-to: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN> Message-ID: <871qm8wf8e.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61894 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes: > Currently teams are described mostly as pools of people who can mentor > contributors in a particular area and who can review patches in that > area. My proposal is to give teams formal approval power over changes > to code in their area. > > This is sorta happening already, but informally: if a non-committer > sends a patch, someone from the team eventually =E2=80=9Capproves=E2=80= =9D it by pushing > it. Within a team, the situation is different: people usually discuss > changes, and the submitter (also committer) eventually pushes them; > sometimes, the submitter pushes changes without getting approval (or > feedback) from others on the team. > > With the proposed policy, members of a team would also have to review > and approve each other=E2=80=99s work. Formal approval means getting an > explicit =E2=80=9CLGTM=E2=80=9D (or similar) from at least one other team= member. > > This is similar to the review thresholds found on GitLab & co., where > project admins can specify a minimum number of approvals required before > a change is marked as ready. I think it avoids the unavoidable > misunderstandings that can arise in a growing group and help pacify > day-to-day collaboration. I guess I'm still a team sceptic, I think the idea is interesting and I have added myself as a member of some teams. But the main impact on me so far is that I've just been getting some unwanted personal email, messages that previously wouldn't have landed in my inbox have been doing so. Regarding this change specifically though, I'm unclear how it would impact the things I push for others. I pushed some patches today, would this mean that I'd have to look at what team/teams are involved (according to /etc/teams.scm.in) for each commit/series, and then either continue if I'm a member of that team, or skip it if I'm not? If I'm going to not be pushing stuff I would have previously pushed because I'm not in the relevant teams, maybe I should just add myself to every team? I guess this is not a serious question, but I'm more making the point that if teams become a formal part of patch review, then some formalities over membership of a team is probably a prerequsite. As a point of clarification, if a patch or series touches files that fall within the scope of several teams, am I correct in saying that this change would require approval from all teams? Thanks, Chris --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmP/i+JfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9Xfggg//Q5dqVs810PhFfWu42fgfn5ddY7DknJdT FYamJun/Fsb/NFYyibTIP2iWnkdYTRLZpKye5LE3o4JDGJw8nQSrFe45Y2PmRPBI lOmZlTXLuTY4ZblXfesqnFf4XTA6oaD7cVHV0LuPoPtZ+J+ghgiQTu2w9uC0roup 8DRBjCfwl2/qCFN8zvLcgIVHWeOxTii5SZrcs7m/nP2ZTAYpTjuhcNEjlv15PNBF QDTzvHMoESjUeqlEIFB9Q0vksyCMY+BcCZxqnOJ3+xHVfWlXyv1e5wPrjZbWX3+2 5/KFYYcpeCZQhI+9+2p4ptuFdfFmoJS/oPa2Nyyfq/1rExbR3aCnfkbMlltyRcPO z88e7CtG94WeqXMkChprh7tklQlQWBNkYRgVDDxdca8B5fmsnierXUDudG32q72D FPSgqNfT068EnptHVpzVbhhL6+0j/oj7wH8i4sqH2VrGWS+0iVbbRPUWXlqKM5nT LpuYsuima/YwNN7ZsFvnoC78D842SdvQWWvBrHQyCNqIqNAbjIldl8HAcTGvAMUU 9ynAxjZDM/CxmGDsEaP0dcHIgj6iNthAXaX4HWVrKHCtHN/2+HABJeocvMATMfk6 eyw8F/PzY2h2aY8FxSvBF4Zx5hFAULeIihLo0pBc4fuEiYJDI0UPsoVYsplL2wjP VcsLfBk3E7U= =2xHO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Mar 2023 16:13:43 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 01 11:13:43 2023
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54743 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1pXP5K-00011V-SF
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 11:13:43 -0500
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:35820)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pXP5I-00011L-G0
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 11:13:41 -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 <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pXP5A-0007KG-Ku
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 11:13:34 -0500
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 <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pXP59-0005RW-B3
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 11:13:32 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:Subject:To:From:in-reply-to:
references; bh=BcVypeuNB7JKifBjRW15e0NZWsomFfrCZXl1DG8SR60=; b=F8K5ZmgrpcwPcc
FnjhhJXwYpBc9/XOJABvsS35hvNHaBrQaO2XXaE5OJ4kAZDXes2j6vGsDdtSV8XN/jWOdzN6Llmf/
2LdR/G+nYGh54neyEol/BCi2yqKsN6OA4Naay+gU+Ql3B+3ooZ+QQYf+k0Mdh48gDMQqsm5vWGy98
wJJNQnMGSjuquD2l8o6ytKaRBWuaxZnD77vryzuQbUq3fcSVS7hIxmb0wnFe8UNkUQ+Y/LxsWAkZS
LN6FlYuAidanbcJCWPEzdBBDABSVU1mIxt0J/oJoV5gvnE1nvTUtStpowgnwp/EIkENERi+rZ1ZXV
TNVqqr+BEtVffVEaMaww==;
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 <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1pXP58-0002jv-Ps
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 11:13:31 -0500
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: guix-patches@HIDDEN
Subject: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
X-Debbugs-Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@HIDDEN>, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN
X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/
X-Revolutionary-Date: Primidi 11 =?utf-8?Q?Vent=C3=B4se?= an 231 de la
=?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour du Narcisse
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, 01 Mar 2023 17:13:28 +0100
Message-ID: <878rgga1qv.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Guix!
The project has been steadily gaining new contributors, which is great,
and I think we need to adjust our processes accordingly.
Currently teams are described mostly as pools of people who can mentor
contributors in a particular area and who can review patches in that
area. My proposal is to give teams formal approval power over changes
to code in their area.
This is sorta happening already, but informally: if a non-committer
sends a patch, someone from the team eventually =E2=80=9Capproves=E2=80=9D =
it by pushing
it. Within a team, the situation is different: people usually discuss
changes, and the submitter (also committer) eventually pushes them;
sometimes, the submitter pushes changes without getting approval (or
feedback) from others on the team.
With the proposed policy, members of a team would also have to review
and approve each other=E2=80=99s work. Formal approval means getting an
explicit =E2=80=9CLGTM=E2=80=9D (or similar) from at least one other team m=
ember.
This is similar to the review thresholds found on GitLab & co., where
project admins can specify a minimum number of approvals required before
a change is marked as ready. I think it avoids the unavoidable
misunderstandings that can arise in a growing group and help pacify
day-to-day collaboration.
Below is a suggested change.
What do people think?
Ludo=E2=80=99.
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-patch; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
diff --git a/doc/contributing.texi b/doc/contributing.texi
index c436bc4a31..d8ca6802c4 100644
--- a/doc/contributing.texi
+++ b/doc/contributing.texi
@@ -1486,7 +1486,7 @@ reply to incoming bugs and patches, which contains th=
e bug number.
@anchor{Notifying Teams}
@cindex teams
The @file{etc/teams.scm} script may be used to notify all those who
-may be interested in your patch of its existence (@pxref{Teams}).
+may be interested in your patch and may approve it (@pxref{Teams}).
Use @command{etc/teams.scm list-teams} to display all the teams,
decide which team(s) your patch relates to, and use
@command{etc/teams.scm cc} to output various @command{git send-email}
@@ -1557,6 +1557,9 @@ these changes are necessary.
@subsection Teams
@cindex teams
=20
+The project is structured as @dfn{teams}, which play two related roles:
+mentoring people who contribute code in their area of expertise, and
+reviewing and approving changes to that code.
There are several teams mentoring different parts of the Guix source
code. To list all those teams, you can run from a Guix checkout:
=20
@@ -1840,8 +1843,14 @@ Patches}). It also allows patches to be picked up a=
nd tested by the
quality assurance tooling; the result of that testing eventually shows
up on the dashboard at
@indicateurl{https://qa.guix.gnu.org/issue/@var{ISSUE_NUMBER}}, where
-@var{ISSUE_NUMBER} is the number assigned by the issue tracker. Leave
-time for a review, without committing anything (@pxref{Submitting
+@var{ISSUE_NUMBER} is the number assigned by the issue tracker.
+
+When your patch falls under the area of expertise of a team
+(@pxref{Teams}), you need the explicit approval of at least one team
+member before committing (another team member if you are on the team).
+
+In other cases,
+leave time for a review, without committing anything (@pxref{Submitting
Patches}). If you didn=E2=80=99t receive any reply after one week (two we=
eks
for more significant changes), and if you're confident, it's OK to
commit.
--=-=-=--
Ludovic Courtès <ludo@HIDDEN>:guix-devel@HIDDEN, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, guix-patches@HIDDEN.
Full text available.guix-devel@HIDDEN, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#61894; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.