Noé Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Feb 2025 21:19:20 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Feb 18 16:19:20 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34668 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tkUzv-0001DX-QC for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 16:19:20 -0500 Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([2a01:5b40:0:3006::1]:35746) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tkUzr-0001Cm-Tq for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 16:19:17 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202502; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:From: Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=tgqbucBcL0Q2gqG0KR4ZB1Zutzy4WOmJuUyzoYJYcb4=; b=H JoxaEWuy48stjKz5oMgz6/oVyqzzaaGyX4cBUaeMsKWBibbwxvoh3CZ+mYCkOahQZd+WykU6k2Nf1 E6dJqKkUQ1ecp7YEo+QcdIvIJmAN0mh7rWcBlr8vOJfFhjNUCmf4vB4zkjTtRwm8PSW/4c/oBLbtq ASbZeILWSHvV+/VprD1np9XjOyyQ35fOfakx2LZQOIf4SZ62QrBx3DnkYxWDyZsAYLeM2FFaHCy2g 7kR2bgQClI8sdKRatwVJYurakBTkABrzjYyFCE5L/Ky/Ay1OnfB4vyKCRgmYkg3CnipiNZvjLymWY Rp82UEffTB7u6zBe14H6wtywxBzoqxkcQ==; Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1tkUzl-00D1Y1-GH; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 22:19:09 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document: Git repo and workflow In-Reply-To: <87ldu3npg4.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87ldu3npg4.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 22:19:01 +0100 Message-ID: <87eczvgddm.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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 (-) Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: > Hi all, > > Please consider the Git repository hosting the GCDs: > > https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git/ > > And the README file proposes a workflow. It=E2=80=99s up to changes. :-) > > Feel free to drop new GCDs. However, please consider that it takes time > to read and forge an opinion on some heavy topics, so refrain from > shooting more than 3 GCDs in the same time frame, for what my opinion is > worth. > > Cheers, > simon Thanks for setting this up! No=C3=A9
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Feb 2025 17:21:43 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Feb 18 12:21:43 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60422 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tkRHz-0000zD-C5
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 12:21:43 -0500
Received: from mail-wr1-x431.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::431]:44238)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tkRHw-0000ya-KO
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 12:21:41 -0500
Received: by mail-wr1-x431.google.com with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38dd9b3419cso3104585f8f.0
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 09:21:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1739899294; x=1740504094; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=m/SrjLwOAnSG1zfhMmHGKMyIWmcZtV+9wU8oHll4JN0=;
b=k/d6hsWhxwXJbZeao2T6pBsLcuqBxZE18H6icqpGjb9ynhZTnP0BEaJxiP32PKO1bh
EZqmslbYOdYTdaHz+aq5xxHaw82pT7o66Hzau4mmpDxsaJRZOIyJr/8qZh4GYr1bfDNt
Izc/QdeMivugVaZIXu/M+g4hU+QS4rHW9jaOJt7QRiJZ+mnYZfEx7ASlaq+Agct/N9pQ
9uLXTypOBVnZ9Rynn4NXzDhFp32ImrMBhEfyWbmUO9abkWb/P0ga699JzA0spKdrTjtQ
2MSr7GCncSmhid859IKnywNZH9aJUeFgx465zS0FY4r79JM2L8I3qCWRqJInaAZtPUgc
sDdg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1739899294; x=1740504094;
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=m/SrjLwOAnSG1zfhMmHGKMyIWmcZtV+9wU8oHll4JN0=;
b=Ea6b+8woUJGKL0SxBLEWrOQpsBInYXIxiwJbpkn7iaFeOuMSPlBx5XxstpuIZ8kGKA
vZ3Jz/N+9WjWw9zmSMUhNLusz5w1RFgt7KEhA+K2mrBpM5B4j/JOYEHvaxVdN9YOl2xF
/97mhJ7wbyT8lzJ6S8ma7JvlJ1mQRxLhQt2ZyqHSjh+/EXLNFYqn02bYCZ4aWjx5iRPe
b30uYrkN91Th0iUpLv00n2igVQ3Jg0aoUczdjFBlHfwIiXU93XKgt29ICu0MMC+gIZX/
QrgnRS9iqdxYIjBer1bi4QfFc/+aKbPR05U8eQYVlZyrAS7BNKT1b4CHlv1LxAX/GIVR
dX9w==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCVtqlZNeF1vk8xPgTOsiGKQj3ObAUbOTdnFx/oeXWBUxyHFBEsOjbvXKdKtbASdXoFHOSIX3A==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yykyj+zMc0bWYzG3U53OAFSV2Qeqg+bDXjAFVCQhqO7dNbm8UfN
m8PF8dgX0SerIg0QtdZYWS38bmxNRQ3l9pmf5y8JxqoZeteV1eQk8JdKoA==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncs1COhxDd7uFuFrlOr5l7BsQ4oEWXdVFkMwQQ7mLjGwP4QK9j56mEnXT1xDHm6
Td57i6TvM0KQeJIf4ormmzIliQgn7eWb4gRjc5cGLX0zwu/O18MfBpopmZiGI1z7eJcZUrYtRbI
KhZvlPKf56fGlm3qzXvvsiOv13fJ9V+j5y2oKsiwhH8GouuBxOsqrW4cDrrvxFIubkEpLoP4yzi
4FFa3k9ts3vukQWBn+MQPliWFQs15RiShEu6k0e5/mi9A3je51F3ndCzHYSTPjwpo1fKpGFFr2R
mQgpWGD9NtE16A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGr+4Lkf4LYh+Lmji78B4V6eVq7XpnplI/wf+HhSjpyQ0kCKeq+Hwk/t/e3e4Jm1IZUNRHg+g==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:518f:0:b0:38b:d7c3:3768 with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38f33f1c705mr9152551f8f.12.1739899294266;
Tue, 18 Feb 2025 09:21:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:89b4:6627:3631:6a69])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-4395a04f8a2sm187383975e9.2.2025.02.18.09.21.33
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Tue, 18 Feb 2025 09:21:34 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN
Subject: Guix Consensus Document: Git repo and workflow
In-Reply-To: <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN>
<875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 18:16:27 +0100
Message-ID: <87ldu3npg4.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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
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 all,
Please consider the Git repository hosting the GCDs:
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git/
And the README file proposes a workflow. It=E2=80=99s up to changes. :-)
Feel free to drop new GCDs. However, please consider that it takes time
to read and forge an opinion on some heavy topics, so refrain from
shooting more than 3 GCDs in the same time frame, for what my opinion is
worth.
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Feb 2025 18:43:32 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Feb 14 13:43:32 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51727 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tj0ex-0001VU-Vw for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Feb 2025 13:43:32 -0500 Received: from fout-b6-smtp.messagingengine.com ([202.12.124.149]:36107) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <leo@HIDDEN>) id 1tj0eu-0001VD-FW for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 14 Feb 2025 13:43:29 -0500 Received: from phl-compute-05.internal (phl-compute-05.phl.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A492011400A8; Fri, 14 Feb 2025 13:43:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-02 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-05.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 14 Feb 2025 13:43:22 -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:subject:subject:to:to; s=mesmtp; t=1739558602; x= 1739645002; bh=Ptaedwz20T949CmpAG5tnaoZsBwEnwX92l11NHFimP4=; b=F wwiV7RPlFjJvGI8O897HBV+GmlEqMfOxFrx5WOi/GZgSNNjSNjKrJD5hv2lUK+Df w11xRASGox7KpqoDA7aotJXa5UvJIK1Oj/V5gO+HxLMZILvddUlbnLTcf1Y0W1mq Lw4IvUVK4XWNJ/Gwo3Hosa08gid8B1lmuLnU4g+Neg= 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:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1739558602; x=1739645002; bh=Ptaedwz20T949CmpAG5tnaoZsBwEnwX92l1 1NHFimP4=; b=QbGrgWUQknobouhFuiR/hk9NXBU6tD675yawZVla3XnDrcBv7Bv P+rlIe9n0ekxSKhNFMYhwSIml2fm7EquJ4ReUobdR4kUHv48tPeICSbKgqNxUT8Y YbYJagO34UobzjSsgun0Chz7ZZZ16F/CTWQ+TrjSaCLZGKTjRmwVANLHULtGiPUC 2FJjwYCBSxp2SbUHxtfafH/iu3AuNQ1SBNfcUSF9JRqbyz7nhf9/tNt+8oI8O7Ne yJ/eKREglu0BBsT+O6ikAycP9nKSvcJH3qmyqW59geyvXzDTLvpD8E+QhB/G+JMv Wi//49is4mdKH1n7j36Aa2IwFOcVoKqxICA== X-ME-Sender: <xms:yo6vZ_Z4eLECYVvqfUdVCj9wf7VeMDGq86Zw4lRI0t3xV7XZeASEcw> <xme:yo6vZ-agtuscd0QuHctebnfM5m6Kseczjn6oqqsmtB5PUIAP5VZNKmM23Iv_ZYDpY TKH60p6Lb-3Aagtqg> X-ME-Received: <xmr:yo6vZx9-uTDCn2nENTduyptxiVjuqx6Ix7MTrEFP-5z3y0cUhM-xUSz6_iG_tMmwu9O11Md39FJAbEQmrFv-tpCq> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgdehtdegtdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdp uffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivg hnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttdej necuhfhrohhmpefnvghoucfhrghmuhhlrghrihcuoehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnh grmhgvqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeegvdeugeelteegieelleeugfetleeujeegtdei udetiefhteeghffgvdekvdeiveenucffohhmrghinhepghhnuhdrohhrghenucevlhhush htvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehlvghosehfrghmuhhl rghrihdrnhgrmhgvpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeefpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthdprh gtphhtthhopehluhguohesghhnuhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehguhhigidquggvvhgv lhesghhnuhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopeejgeejfeeiseguvggssghughhsrdhgnhhurd horhhg X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:yo6vZ1r5wdGsIlmkExaJMQHWbH1mxyYsWo6cgbrrRn0tlKEuJylLsg> <xmx:yo6vZ6rL2bxRRiBExwikPwbf8b5wkoaJb1eA6JrhtPYQv5eiwq73KA> <xmx:yo6vZ7QPVcNQPDaw_AK-qpOwci7etkS-nIwSg2CJpOCBGr2fSJs0PA> <xmx:yo6vZyr54JslemTjA1RInBUoqmD0bTcyxSXTIgUpcT0_yfs-pGAVQw> <xmx:yo6vZ9U3ZPlOH-IM7AFwQ-6YVSPOgvhi4Umhn8H_oZVcd-0Xp3uyzmIU> Feedback-ID: i819c4023:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 14 Feb 2025 13:43:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 13:43:20 -0500 From: Leo Famulari <leo@HIDDEN> To: Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] Guix Consensus Document process ratified! Message-ID: <Z6-OyJBKWPjh3CoM@HIDDEN> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5Ez5MqT0rhFbTpt7" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 (-) --5Ez5MqT0rhFbTpt7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 10:40:15PM +0100, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > =C2=B9 Here=E2=80=99s what I collected from the deliberation thread at > <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736>: >=20 > * Support (team members) >=20 > - Andreas Enge > - Andr=C3=A9 Batista > - Andrew Tropin > - Efraim Flashner > - Ekaitz Zarraga > - Eric Bavier > - Florian Pelz > - Guillaume Le Vaillant > - Ian Eure > - Janneke Nieuwenhuizen > - jgart > - Lars-Dominik Braun > - Laurent Gatto > - Liliana Marie Prikler > - Ludovic Court=C3=A8s > - Maxim Cournoyer > - Nicolas Goaziou > - Ricardo Wurmus > - Sharlatan Hellseher > - Tanguy Le Carrour > - Tobias Geerinckx-Rice > - =E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6 (iyzsong) I did the email incorrectly, but I did send a message of support that somehow landed on info-guix, but not the thread for #74736. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-guix/2025-01/msg00000.html Just to get on record :) --5Ez5MqT0rhFbTpt7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEaEByLu7k06ZO5T6saqwZY3V/R/8FAmevjsQACgkQaqwZY3V/ R/87Yw//R+/fNlOSRzNv+PlwjCGOj07jOSpdmZlk2+QP2Bok3svcmfGokjI+ux7j YJ9nzETAD1ZiwOCQT+/bcDU12vUQo1b7b0496eOAnrA1FnWXVnDN7Wgjt5oxdV5x BFHkmHFQUFCix5l1etN6oSdl/R8+iAW7ytbYZPTzVOEqaTa4Qla33LenQJlT22nr JQ5jy3SGtL8zLEidni/6DRHccqThY8Q1fIb+MJZI1/jVBNGbOymeZ3ET0NAyrWJc GsQ/EMvNIZNK/hhc1fif2Bqn9lUu9dlJJ/tfn0fQ8vLrw+WCtwh5O1g3xzPbnDRv ofJNWv6BcTgik+LDLlT3y2meJ9gHdEJ5gqNYpZqwyERDsTctUMVI5Fn5WfHre5AJ Ps3+62AmZsLqVR1jtL+Gj5Dr0lsN1HiGz0uW5fAF3vr4TPXi5YFbH9VDDtF7zW1n 1cyyLUL1PsjQTFzNcpbCWIxpC8MRKfJgzipKyBheQW0/ltAFWu1+rHCwBwfOkGLV N4w0xu8VVEF3MOSM1nau7URSiMNlfMHxCQRjjsGnyNAkrpLGf2qRFZTzNPr1I/ed CwVbxIi4BFLawBf59HdMUdXuvfovDal8xI2MQKjasoNcrgNtKlPN/Up7rHYnVmU9 UqLTEgMh0VOo89RNdu9nZSuSGbPc7opYTv3KZsXUAs/e0Cug08I= =npis -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5Ez5MqT0rhFbTpt7--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2025 09:50:20 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Feb 07 04:50:20 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32878 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tgL08-0000wD-BW for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 04:50:20 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33724) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tgL05-0000vo-MY for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 04:50:18 -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 1tgKzz-00076y-B9; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 04:50:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=vDmgU1SwNVLLvX6x6mfuQB5zqX+zG8B049++6nAwvc0=; b=rBsp2YeGgEPIUjzCA49V HfsdaC4kqpDox1RTt4mNNDkF7LiRt2CQtpM1NWzoCA3naIFNj8KKGZGOLsdhLy4DWDe3ClAFwIzSW tvIov/xi9aVLtHtIrqZxWjVDoWX69CbYhrWh/ZadT2jebM3CsB9AWZb8DsgGL3kNV3ilpf1UhxoBD xCs5H4mCm67oiUcgiNJ8bIT3r7Y2CVcbjJoGC0j6toQwHYCx+rg3I0AcDOXCeQ5zhC2qtLgZH4RZ8 BDW6e0zK+r2BO8TKY6JXk22i130vqKiuk4hfC86akQ/TtQv3RRQmbSeQYI7qYi/GMogRHYpplvXPx Y9Na7U6/dpmmPw==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Divya Ranjan <divya@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <1101F8AF-BD45-4163-88C2-5510F70EF242@HIDDEN> (Divya Ranjan's message of "Thu, 06 Feb 2025 22:34:38 +0000") References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <1101F8AF-BD45-4163-88C2-5510F70EF242@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2025 10:50:08 +0100 Message-ID: <87a5ay3wz3.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 Divya, Divya Ranjan <divya@HIDDEN> skribis: > Glad that we've finalized the GCD! Really happy to see it. But is it that= you've missed my "I support" or that my name is not there in /etc/teams.sc= m? I just did a search in https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736 and found that = I had sent a "I support" on 25th Jan 17:18 UTC. My bad, sorry about that! It does not change the end result but it is important to make sure no reply goes unnoticed. Thanks for the heads-up! Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2025 09:24:51 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Feb 07 04:24:51 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32832 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tgKbT-00081F-9J for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 04:24:51 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]:53598) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <efraim.flashner@HIDDEN>) id 1tgKbR-00080x-Ai for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 04:24:50 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4361f796586so20959165e9.3 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 01:24:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1738920283; x=1739525083; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; 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=cFf8qWoslxT8nsSlnBatXSoWlizreKDgI02VxX4YG10=; b=CJbGBIm+jB3gc5/s4hLWV3vcTxKnBBpEkvwrq0pJJLELKHX1kn3SiVHztmYH9bfMvc ZVzqkM0pARhO+lPqQ5E+Jfd3qZ0pzzP6jBj+NyKMBQG3/mriAXxLuOXkzdt0dtyyEthO AV3HUeVAaKr9UE0+ShykJu2+eIlZov9Cilrlbnp2rKe9KCgGZ+rXrsIZY1l9L989v2XW l/ONBHt5tM25LkzyfM71kYbHTI74RpzLF6x3zb1vIWPomRKoSnHPX0L3YBI969YT49M+ JBMmApeDhH8zGmd9TFCjrbt0gmKLC58/dgz+/0u5eY8OUJnNDI/GiKm3tSQwPEcHV+Y5 TMLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1738920283; x=1739525083; 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=cFf8qWoslxT8nsSlnBatXSoWlizreKDgI02VxX4YG10=; b=ptJmaIWxwy0NhVkJOu4B3Tzo1shk20vzo72URly0ZB94w31VFoxxh4/reF3eDsve/v FRiPI5k50DFMVdDpltiBLkA819QRljtfs2wjy+YmsA/Yo+pdlNHctUcWBjRqORcApR1p 6juNnkMMCxQQgVcmryNJ4AXJuipWd26AWhaPODFKXLmkDz3jP09v7n/FrL1NnppjBiQE jAw44JmoD/8jeu4+uxrPtnfQXWAnafmayyd+ZQdYTydZsxtumvCIMjemQf5v8liLAfhd jjWOGl7gP5IoffwC4T39G1bOpWKhW7K9y9QQJpouwIDMdhAFg4H5AH0hE09YA2w8UIu6 tFqA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVhgllCtIAYotcM+q7E9Yy5C9sp7WW2pNCDqbuEPm3N6RLjCarVurOexHSJdsDsFpD14V7aTw==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzE3cOGBon/svZabIEsFHjpegk4JAn0V0dq4xdph+AvTY+UGVzp 7pEevrHKCdhTiM2wasqTVND9WIRbXbECRCB1iRqfRzckyP7LWg1h X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncu1dmdK6A14EBFMmJ26s9kMZpclR6cCQbNbuYxQRsbCd8A64NGmkqATyXZrsKp 41Dmoihvu1+Xjd8o/rNizok1lMpLUOU8M2DvBkznUJXYhGmtVUbTHl95rWw9/up350EC4RmRabM SD8g6aL2pbsy6GV1sr5nACPZ5vRGZVaQOa4H2oxOzl+OeZqlibS8Qnb/Y8d0QUoErzNCOt2SYsc af1xRC5u1ChpyaMWc9wHrFKbnxZukoLAN2pe7Z1jAMICfdSkgmhqbAVUYQMngRiXIu9QkISChBb WHjzbhO4+iOsPhk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE6d9oJ5cbsqX2YzjXHaHpqxX3y7Rmm31hbYlDtqpasazKedkopdLhSJZ73rE1NALIkp1qYvg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4f91:b0:436:916b:aaf4 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4392498a1b5mr25261675e9.10.1738920282747; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 01:24:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([141.226.10.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-4390daf4453sm82533075e9.31.2025.02.07.01.24.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 07 Feb 2025 01:24:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 11:24:38 +0200 From: Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN> To: Divya Ranjan <divya@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process ratified! Message-ID: <Z6XRVtzimthm-Ud1@3900XT> Mail-Followup-To: Divya Ranjan <divya@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <1101F8AF-BD45-4163-88C2-5510F70EF242@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DSM+uNEnI47rlXs4" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1101F8AF-BD45-4163-88C2-5510F70EF242@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: 0.1 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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: -0.9 (/) --DSM+uNEnI47rlXs4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 10:34:38PM +0000, Divya Ranjan wrote: > Hello Ludo, >=20 > Glad that we've finalized the GCD! Really happy to see it. But is it that= you've missed my "I support" or that my name is not there in /etc/teams.sc= m? I just did a search in https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736 and found that = I had sent a "I support" on 25th Jan 17:18 UTC. >=20 > It doesn't matter since the GCD has been accepted overall, but just wante= d to ensure I successfully submitted it. It might not matter for the final tally, but it *is* important to count all the votes and keep track of the process. --=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 --DSM+uNEnI47rlXs4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEoov0DD5VE3JmLRT3Qarn3Mo9g1EFAmel0VMACgkQQarn3Mo9 g1GHOA//TgugI7wf3fbZR+vk6YHFk3QHd5EwkpO7+2BU4232bJstnzY1QuII7j7q NoT3eAYABK5ARJsp+J/4bQ2J9bszbQOo2EsnMj9eMOK5lm6Iz+7oietmZd76mxND oCqc6jhTvIr+F8q45gDPDqJVv0hUqBmG0yWNR9Scf3x/47AjyBEmrMSkbMC45zn8 SKBrYA+cbAktGphclKPusuf4xz7J7oZMLl/ujS6Ml2OVou8xXt0snkx5bQMYgYdZ 4fI0INPVIewvUws7O0hOUeT8RaFkkAzTcMjKPS7A1DGn+tpQXf7tOSx3m0FYbdJ7 qCAJK8i2Vag0pXeOqEaW4b8CCefhYWJbz1H2Qng2+zVczN9g0gAhKIN/qLjqaEum BF1EUUCqnTq3uvGXcTV1mDREzQs1ipuMWiFOVTrRQqqbzEd/Sg0v3FXQTs7zUgA/ 1b45k5o1BTe9QnZkUlnX7lPHqfia8KMwcJbJTbK4cdKH+hmhzPqHVdABDOReQrqC jALkGEmorpY9edTdmAMTelshE4Ay7oQ1VbOBLeLDfBnOHzcDjhpNJANuB/ufXFjt AyBsdWI5mlKEcVbGJkTjYC6RvNlQ7Z4hWkaR7Wf0YayOjCLEKWUvNbDuGeys5GIT ewim51bpQQTE4ZwsGmdml8MSRKc8lJhBBLf45yw3YkfegbD+69o= =kSJx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --DSM+uNEnI47rlXs4--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Feb 2025 22:41:11 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Feb 06 17:41:11 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59739 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tgAYZ-0002Ky-7i for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Feb 2025 17:41:11 -0500 Received: from confino.investici.org ([93.190.126.19]:31331) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <divya@HIDDEN>) id 1tgAYW-0002Kk-Fq for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Feb 2025 17:41:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=subvertising.org; s=stigmate; t=1738881667; bh=KbVy+gMxxFwrndQJUc9GCOFisAdPoYQWiFuAtzRAM5k=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=nwdPNrP4YQfK7P3D9nJUjuiubSKMaKkpp2zfZ8o3H3pLfe7pN4ac8M9ekae9ZJY9B 2N6UOMgnM9dKg6pFTSCC3eNN6B8X8cHxn36qLmhvMEIuyLBtBVm+WeduLmotPBN8Cb HUeYJ8pPcN0YVCwMAwv+MdG4sxOx1fNTVzPENprA= Received: from mx1.investici.org (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by confino.investici.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4YpsX336CMz111Y; Thu, 6 Feb 2025 22:41:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [93.190.126.19] (mx1.investici.org [93.190.126.19]) (Authenticated sender: divya@HIDDEN) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YpsX24cggz111T; Thu, 6 Feb 2025 22:41:06 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2025 22:34:38 +0000 From: Divya Ranjan <divya@HIDDEN> To: guix-devel@HIDDEN, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ludovic_Court=E8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process ratified! User-Agent: Thunderbird for Android In-Reply-To: <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> Message-ID: <1101F8AF-BD45-4163-88C2-5510F70EF242@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=----OD0A3K8XVS0UBFYX011KWJWQQM1TEV Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?No=E9_Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-) ------OD0A3K8XVS0UBFYX011KWJWQQM1TEV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Ludo, Glad that we've finalized the GCD! Really happy to see it=2E But is it tha= t you've missed my "I support" or that my name is not there in /etc/teams= =2Escm? I just did a search in https://issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736 and = found that I had sent a "I support" on 25th Jan 17:18 UTC=2E It doesn't matter since the GCD has been accepted overall, but just wanted= to ensure I successfully submitted it=2E Regards, On 6 February 2025 21:40:15 GMT, "Ludovic Court=C3=A8s" <ludo@gnu=2Eorg> w= rote: >Hello Guix, > >The Guix Consensus Document (GCD) deliberation process was set to expire >yesterday, February 5th, anywhere on Earth=2E I was quite impatient so I >checked the results=C2=B9: 22 team members expressed support; quorum was = 25% >of 44 people=C2=B2, or 11 people, so we=E2=80=99re good=2E The GCD proce= ss is accepted! > >Really happy that we can move forward with this and thankful to everyone >who participated=2E > >Simon, No=C3=A9: let=E2=80=99s coordinate to update guix-consensus-docume= nts=2Egit and >to communicate=2E > >Ludo=E2=80=99=2E > > >=C2=B9 Here=E2=80=99s what I collected from the deliberation thread at > <https://issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736>: > > * Support (team members) > > - Andreas Enge > - Andr=C3=A9 Batista > - Andrew Tropin > - Efraim Flashner > - Ekaitz Zarraga > - Eric Bavier > - Florian Pelz > - Guillaume Le Vaillant > - Ian Eure > - Janneke Nieuwenhuizen > - jgart > - Lars-Dominik Braun > - Laurent Gatto > - Liliana Marie Prikler > - Ludovic Court=C3=A8s > - Maxim Cournoyer > - Nicolas Goaziou > - Ricardo Wurmus > - Sharlatan Hellseher > - Tanguy Le Carrour > - Tobias Geerinckx-Rice > - =E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6 (iyzsong) > > * Support (other contributors) > > - David Thompson > - Gabriel Wicki > - Hilton Chain > - Timothy Sample > - Zheng Junjie > > * Accept (other contributors) > > - Hartmut Goebel > >=C2=B2 =E2=80=9C=2E/etc/teams=2Escm list-teams |recsel -P members |sort -= u |wc -l=E2=80=9D > returns 44 as of c8c025973bf9bfc060b7cc82c6b025ebd87ffa2f, but that > includes one blank line=2E > Divya Ranjan, Mathematics, Philosophy and Libre Software ------OD0A3K8XVS0UBFYX011KWJWQQM1TEV Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html><head></head><body><div dir=3D"auto">Hello Ludo,<br><br>Glad that we'= ve finalized the GCD! Really happy to see it=2E But is it that you've misse= d my "I support" or that my name is not there in /etc/teams=2Escm? I just d= id a search in <a href=3D"https://issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736">https://= issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736</a>=C2=A0and found that I had sent a "I sup= port" on 25th Jan 17:18 UTC=2E<br><br>It doesn't matter since the GCD has b= een accepted overall, but just wanted to ensure I successfully submitted it= =2E<br><br>Regards,</div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"aut= o">On 6 February 2025 21:40:15 GMT, "Ludovic Court=C3=A8s" <ludo@gnu=2Eo= rg> wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt 0= pt 0pt 0=2E8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1e= x;"> <pre class=3D"k9mail"><div dir=3D"auto">Hello Guix,<br><br>The Guix Consen= sus Document (GCD) deliberation process was set to expire<br>yesterday, Feb= ruary 5th, anywhere on Earth=2E I was quite impatient so I<br>checked the = results=C2=B9: 22 team members expressed support; quorum was 25%<br>of 44 p= eople=C2=B2, or 11 people, so we=E2=80=99re good=2E The GCD process is acc= epted!<br><br>Really happy that we can move forward with this and thankful = to everyone<br>who participated=2E<br><br>Simon, No=C3=A9: let=E2=80=99s co= ordinate to update guix-consensus-documents=2Egit and<br>to communicate=2E<= br><br>Ludo=E2=80=99=2E<br><br><br>=C2=B9 Here=E2=80=99s what I collected f= rom the deliberation thread at<br> <<a href=3D"https://issues=2Eguix=2E= gnu=2Eorg/74736">https://issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736</a>>:<br><br> = * Support (team members)<br><br> - Andreas Enge<br> - Andr=C3=A9 Bati= sta<br> - Andrew Tropin<br> - Efraim Flashner<br> - Ekaitz Zarraga= <br> - Eric Bavier<br> - Florian Pelz<br> - Guillaume Le Vaillant<= br> - Ian Eure<br> - Janneke Nieuwenhuizen<br> - jgart<br> - La= rs-Dominik Braun<br> - Laurent Gatto<br> - Liliana Marie Prikler<br> = - Ludovic Court=C3=A8s<br> - Maxim Cournoyer<br> - Nicolas Goaziou= <br> - Ricardo Wurmus<br> - Sharlatan Hellseher<br> - Tanguy Le Ca= rrour<br> - Tobias Geerinckx-Rice<br> - =E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6 (= iyzsong)<br><br> * Support (other contributors)<br><br> - David Thompso= n<br> - Gabriel Wicki<br> - Hilton Chain<br> - Timothy Sample<br> = - Zheng Junjie<br><br> * Accept (other contributors)<br><br> - Hartm= ut Goebel<br><br>=C2=B2 =E2=80=9C=2E/etc/teams=2Escm list-teams |recsel -P = members |sort -u |wc -l=E2=80=9D<br> returns 44 as of c8c025973bf9bfc060b7= cc82c6b025ebd87ffa2f, but that<br> includes one blank line=2E<br><br></div= ></pre></blockquote></div><div dir=3D"auto">Divya Ranjan, Mathematics, Phil= osophy and Libre Software</div></body></html> ------OD0A3K8XVS0UBFYX011KWJWQQM1TEV--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Feb 2025 22:35:54 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Feb 06 17:35:54 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59731 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tgATR-00025h-JO for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Feb 2025 17:35:54 -0500 Received: from confino.investici.org ([93.190.126.19]:24143) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <divya@HIDDEN>) id 1tgATO-00025X-RJ for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Feb 2025 17:35:52 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=subvertising.org; s=stigmate; t=1738881349; bh=KbVy+gMxxFwrndQJUc9GCOFisAdPoYQWiFuAtzRAM5k=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=LUIXuAEuPYi6PlaOOaaI/DUGcRodKknkt0cvCkfRJ6vHTJf2fIoZxCRDBtFiQpWUk g3hNkSBehLjK3E0vKFCQBvMI+xeyRC/bmjWAVMHJH62CkINkNqjsxzGWU2QpwR/8Em BmUMe7NMli73PHqIoMoP2XO7L4/uUmUASnlkOD4w= Received: from mx1.investici.org (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by confino.investici.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4YpsPx0TMtz111Y; Thu, 6 Feb 2025 22:35:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [93.190.126.19] (mx1.investici.org [93.190.126.19]) (Authenticated sender: divya@HIDDEN) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YpsPw295qz111T; Thu, 6 Feb 2025 22:35:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2025 22:34:38 +0000 From: Divya Ranjan <divya@HIDDEN> To: guix-devel@HIDDEN, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ludovic_Court=E8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process ratified! User-Agent: Thunderbird for Android In-Reply-To: <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> Message-ID: <1101F8AF-BD45-4163-88C2-5510F70EF242@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=----OD0A3K8XVS0UBFYX011KWJWQQM1TEV Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?No=E9_Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-) ------OD0A3K8XVS0UBFYX011KWJWQQM1TEV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Ludo, Glad that we've finalized the GCD! Really happy to see it=2E But is it tha= t you've missed my "I support" or that my name is not there in /etc/teams= =2Escm? I just did a search in https://issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736 and = found that I had sent a "I support" on 25th Jan 17:18 UTC=2E It doesn't matter since the GCD has been accepted overall, but just wanted= to ensure I successfully submitted it=2E Regards, On 6 February 2025 21:40:15 GMT, "Ludovic Court=C3=A8s" <ludo@gnu=2Eorg> w= rote: >Hello Guix, > >The Guix Consensus Document (GCD) deliberation process was set to expire >yesterday, February 5th, anywhere on Earth=2E I was quite impatient so I >checked the results=C2=B9: 22 team members expressed support; quorum was = 25% >of 44 people=C2=B2, or 11 people, so we=E2=80=99re good=2E The GCD proce= ss is accepted! > >Really happy that we can move forward with this and thankful to everyone >who participated=2E > >Simon, No=C3=A9: let=E2=80=99s coordinate to update guix-consensus-docume= nts=2Egit and >to communicate=2E > >Ludo=E2=80=99=2E > > >=C2=B9 Here=E2=80=99s what I collected from the deliberation thread at > <https://issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736>: > > * Support (team members) > > - Andreas Enge > - Andr=C3=A9 Batista > - Andrew Tropin > - Efraim Flashner > - Ekaitz Zarraga > - Eric Bavier > - Florian Pelz > - Guillaume Le Vaillant > - Ian Eure > - Janneke Nieuwenhuizen > - jgart > - Lars-Dominik Braun > - Laurent Gatto > - Liliana Marie Prikler > - Ludovic Court=C3=A8s > - Maxim Cournoyer > - Nicolas Goaziou > - Ricardo Wurmus > - Sharlatan Hellseher > - Tanguy Le Carrour > - Tobias Geerinckx-Rice > - =E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6 (iyzsong) > > * Support (other contributors) > > - David Thompson > - Gabriel Wicki > - Hilton Chain > - Timothy Sample > - Zheng Junjie > > * Accept (other contributors) > > - Hartmut Goebel > >=C2=B2 =E2=80=9C=2E/etc/teams=2Escm list-teams |recsel -P members |sort -= u |wc -l=E2=80=9D > returns 44 as of c8c025973bf9bfc060b7cc82c6b025ebd87ffa2f, but that > includes one blank line=2E > Divya Ranjan, Mathematics, Philosophy and Libre Software ------OD0A3K8XVS0UBFYX011KWJWQQM1TEV Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html><head></head><body><div dir=3D"auto">Hello Ludo,<br><br>Glad that we'= ve finalized the GCD! Really happy to see it=2E But is it that you've misse= d my "I support" or that my name is not there in /etc/teams=2Escm? I just d= id a search in <a href=3D"https://issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736">https://= issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736</a>=C2=A0and found that I had sent a "I sup= port" on 25th Jan 17:18 UTC=2E<br><br>It doesn't matter since the GCD has b= een accepted overall, but just wanted to ensure I successfully submitted it= =2E<br><br>Regards,</div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"aut= o">On 6 February 2025 21:40:15 GMT, "Ludovic Court=C3=A8s" <ludo@gnu=2Eo= rg> wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt 0= pt 0pt 0=2E8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1e= x;"> <pre class=3D"k9mail"><div dir=3D"auto">Hello Guix,<br><br>The Guix Consen= sus Document (GCD) deliberation process was set to expire<br>yesterday, Feb= ruary 5th, anywhere on Earth=2E I was quite impatient so I<br>checked the = results=C2=B9: 22 team members expressed support; quorum was 25%<br>of 44 p= eople=C2=B2, or 11 people, so we=E2=80=99re good=2E The GCD process is acc= epted!<br><br>Really happy that we can move forward with this and thankful = to everyone<br>who participated=2E<br><br>Simon, No=C3=A9: let=E2=80=99s co= ordinate to update guix-consensus-documents=2Egit and<br>to communicate=2E<= br><br>Ludo=E2=80=99=2E<br><br><br>=C2=B9 Here=E2=80=99s what I collected f= rom the deliberation thread at<br> <<a href=3D"https://issues=2Eguix=2E= gnu=2Eorg/74736">https://issues=2Eguix=2Egnu=2Eorg/74736</a>>:<br><br> = * Support (team members)<br><br> - Andreas Enge<br> - Andr=C3=A9 Bati= sta<br> - Andrew Tropin<br> - Efraim Flashner<br> - Ekaitz Zarraga= <br> - Eric Bavier<br> - Florian Pelz<br> - Guillaume Le Vaillant<= br> - Ian Eure<br> - Janneke Nieuwenhuizen<br> - jgart<br> - La= rs-Dominik Braun<br> - Laurent Gatto<br> - Liliana Marie Prikler<br> = - Ludovic Court=C3=A8s<br> - Maxim Cournoyer<br> - Nicolas Goaziou= <br> - Ricardo Wurmus<br> - Sharlatan Hellseher<br> - Tanguy Le Ca= rrour<br> - Tobias Geerinckx-Rice<br> - =E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6 (= iyzsong)<br><br> * Support (other contributors)<br><br> - David Thompso= n<br> - Gabriel Wicki<br> - Hilton Chain<br> - Timothy Sample<br> = - Zheng Junjie<br><br> * Accept (other contributors)<br><br> - Hartm= ut Goebel<br><br>=C2=B2 =E2=80=9C=2E/etc/teams=2Escm list-teams |recsel -P = members |sort -u |wc -l=E2=80=9D<br> returns 44 as of c8c025973bf9bfc060b7= cc82c6b025ebd87ffa2f, but that<br> includes one blank line=2E<br><br></div= ></pre></blockquote></div><div dir=3D"auto">Divya Ranjan, Mathematics, Phil= osophy and Libre Software</div></body></html> ------OD0A3K8XVS0UBFYX011KWJWQQM1TEV--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Feb 2025 21:40:28 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Feb 06 16:40:28 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59622 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tg9bo-0004q0-0b
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Feb 2025 16:40:28 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45872)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tg9bm-0004pm-HA
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Feb 2025 16:40:26 -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 1tg9be-000173-DH; Thu, 06 Feb 2025 16:40:19 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=8M8+/GcRZ0IuKGaNThKFbwj3wgMFR5SDKSSbwdhZ+P0=; b=YQECZJTtS4lPMLrpbF6V
m+leRScfSK4awjOBTAvdNqRDvdudkuAw+yQUsnRU/U/9N+xm10ZTPAMp3+S9QwLMgi183vNov5Mni
Aqdo1IvrTlSZeOsnz5C61suw/LP+Too1rUWHFR0DFh9YuZBGNfW5iyf8g+J9pQ8SZ8/F5Jae/dAZX
DGFQMoWLYJm2QPLIscsRO36JNGtWavCHyUU4QvfAtuv5rmLsJZ2WEmPSglvXBzyh0QebTiHI+UDMV
AUU9W8+Mfi65ZjbI98ylluAJqS/K/SU57MS6WSk+LMv/JP29Z+d2sxknSPaK6HIa9XfspmYCyKdwH
7PNDv3U3uKukhw==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: guix-devel@HIDDEN
Subject: Guix Consensus Document process ratified!
In-Reply-To: <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 22
Jan 2025 20:49:55 +0100")
References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2025 22:40:15 +0100
Message-ID: <875xlm69c0.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9_Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 Guix,
The Guix Consensus Document (GCD) deliberation process was set to expire
yesterday, February 5th, anywhere on Earth. I was quite impatient so I
checked the results=C2=B9: 22 team members expressed support; quorum was 25%
of 44 people=C2=B2, or 11 people, so we=E2=80=99re good. The GCD process i=
s accepted!
Really happy that we can move forward with this and thankful to everyone
who participated.
Simon, No=C3=A9: let=E2=80=99s coordinate to update guix-consensus-document=
s.git and
to communicate.
Ludo=E2=80=99.
=C2=B9 Here=E2=80=99s what I collected from the deliberation thread at
<https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736>:
* Support (team members)
- Andreas Enge
- Andr=C3=A9 Batista
- Andrew Tropin
- Efraim Flashner
- Ekaitz Zarraga
- Eric Bavier
- Florian Pelz
- Guillaume Le Vaillant
- Ian Eure
- Janneke Nieuwenhuizen
- jgart
- Lars-Dominik Braun
- Laurent Gatto
- Liliana Marie Prikler
- Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
- Maxim Cournoyer
- Nicolas Goaziou
- Ricardo Wurmus
- Sharlatan Hellseher
- Tanguy Le Carrour
- Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
- =E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6 (iyzsong)
* Support (other contributors)
- David Thompson
- Gabriel Wicki
- Hilton Chain
- Timothy Sample
- Zheng Junjie
* Accept (other contributors)
- Hartmut Goebel
=C2=B2 =E2=80=9C./etc/teams.scm list-teams |recsel -P members |sort -u |wc =
-l=E2=80=9D
returns 44 as of c8c025973bf9bfc060b7cc82c6b025ebd87ffa2f, but that
includes one blank line.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Feb 2025 20:13:43 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Feb 05 15:13:43 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52773 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tflmI-00011N-Ta for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2025 15:13:43 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-x833.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::833]:45079) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <dthompson2@HIDDEN>) id 1tflmC-00010q-LK for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2025 15:13:40 -0500 Received: by mail-qt1-x833.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-46fee2b9c7aso1942051cf.2 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 05 Feb 2025 12:13:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=worcester.edu; s=google; t=1738786411; x=1739391211; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=Qvoifa+PoTNIqQu0KolQhurXJ1aqT3VmpXZIAfLNo84=; b=BmSoHpaNG6Elxs/Lipz41gCOILcl8rEyYY08R95zeIEf8vFSjivf0lj8X83LzQAXiG 02rDj7Y/sMUQR9P5rD4vAekc4UBkNlKebZQvp8YHKn0aKic7YamVXHT01l3kF7rUhCy2 eHeOhXhoAKhuM5jU4WxNs59FPUTyb8mwBLIoc= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1738786411; x=1739391211; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Qvoifa+PoTNIqQu0KolQhurXJ1aqT3VmpXZIAfLNo84=; b=bMiJwy6alSDtK+/z18QiD7S4znH93087Kp0ZETqwQX3lBh5aNLZGGDxUPutMpluYyf nCCZWhrzyaDP5lgB2To7wzQU6lZLL1jD2sFlXNeoqRO8yBPnbFR0YHQjT12GrTufwE3h CRC19tyVBMYLwBiDSGfdDwunUptnuVpGlkqIEqmWmsGOGjdohyxHYISCMTKH71QFjlzO nkyqBvG8hr2V9Ubz2OAoC8SWem0Qbisp6HjfCIYh2PKAr6E5ojx7gvIj5Wj0FcA4C/H7 sNTkrvGABM477qzH08FzRdvV4J49FG3vJqxhcjQaxnfifI9FQUvONd4zbjLsNiMq1YEq xndA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUYQ4yRhl00LkgaLvRlVRpNwjSqPf9ubbWPfzD4lrelGpI1NQfZiOAZpYX6z6wzLDFJMOtFOg==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw21FGOTntR+EfhulAyWgwb3sG645hkKLmiL+gYlAN/IxQAmw0s Qd2oHxDXQHjZoHK+NtxLm5I3Q4IqiwreLdELLHcM/OZ2NELK2FN+YsEqdm6jITJQFafYltr3YPZ zUGiSKLPZrZWLDM0WhvOM1JxiA9PuSEu5+FYmFQ== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsMHqoWhrQo/jfR5i+9AsgdGp8DVGNqG1mNNDf/aKtM2xk3PmQE3Mvj6ziO6v3 DpqUDlI1fpYC8Xab+34jgJ//ovs2MYE9Rcg1a2CQFVFSai+EzBxt9BvvA1mvdEj7yVn2f1rsC98 yLeAg41B2+7Cs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGTBkl+mGHHBZWDA2Y4gL0daNc4CRv3MCyNwDk5QVWcn83RiMMAC0RN6YaV7KJxtcbNtEeyoc9UoDMH3sO49nA= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:58d4:0:b0:467:8541:a969 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-470281b60a0mr61388781cf.14.1738786411095; Wed, 05 Feb 2025 12:13:31 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> From: "Thompson, David" <dthompson2@HIDDEN> Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 15:13:19 -0500 X-Gm-Features: AWEUYZnYBtUr99pEPoiWXCfjLRqKSuiV9tEePSr0XBeuPqoxKKn_kSUDKsM2J60 Message-ID: <CAJ=Rwfb-OaDznPjWXw7FWwrZhW1bVN2mcTsT09vZFgrhS2aHUQ@HIDDEN> Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_Guix_Consensus_Document_process_=E2=80=93_deliberation?= To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: info-guix@HIDDEN, 74736 <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 (-) On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 2:44=E2=80=AFPM Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmai= l.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Here is the Guix Consensus Document (GCD) process which implements how > we will collectively make decision on *significant* changes. Since it > bootstraps the process, it=E2=80=99s important to have a common understan= ding of > it. > > If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by > email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org your reply, either: > > =E2=80=A2 I support; > =E2=80=A2 I accept; > =E2=80=A2 I disapprove. I'm not currently on a team but: I approve. - Dave
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Feb 2025 22:32:58 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Feb 04 17:32:58 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47066 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tfRTW-0003qu-6M for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2025 17:32:58 -0500 Received: from relay.yourmailgateway.de ([188.68.61.107]:53427) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <pelzflorian@HIDDEN>) id 1tfRTT-0003qi-BW for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2025 17:32:56 -0500 Received: from mors-relay-8405.netcup.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mors-relay-8405.netcup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4YndRT3BBCz72DP for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 4 Feb 2025 23:32:53 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=pelzflorian.de; s=key2; t=1738708373; bh=iiqeXP04ULEMtC8GkZ/IYbV/6J8zPV5ixz06xWP1mMQ=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=NcfCD3TRYq6eRkCW2TxsrDbk/OTArvkq3U+mHJLZutUpeFTqwY+GsPWrGE2LlFl8B suazZfpiM14wg+RgYLzR32tjIAYWXu60f1KfxEIjBsCG9O+Hr/JUpJQr8TVq4PdrV0 qw+Cq6idVG2OA3heWE+wDtfQqRLsYpY1WlMKjDCX4EAAkpmVLhasYLOy95xshsdQIz MDC3CTkVU8A3LAnQ9M2PWezXnoyGogxjWVIYNxNV2SW5gzdJrDrUj2vMq8xtUU8JqA y3rWLyO5lvC5mww+DrdzUFCwAPFVWvbrOu8n8pTb9LeXNGwxd0XY//JL5hzaRSFjpI FFPKVw1BNq61g== Received: from policy01-mors.netcup.net (unknown [46.38.225.35]) by mors-relay-8405.netcup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4YndRT2VGWz728s for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 4 Feb 2025 23:32:53 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at policy01-mors.netcup.net X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=6.31 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1, BAYES_05=-0.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mxe217.netcup.net (unknown [10.243.12.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by policy01-mors.netcup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4YndRT07F2z8tXH for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 4 Feb 2025 23:32:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from florianhp (ipb21a5dbf.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de [178.26.93.191]) by mxe217.netcup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 79C4684570 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 4 Feb 2025 23:32:51 +0100 (CET) From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:44:08 +0100") References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2025 23:32:58 +0100 Message-ID: <87v7tpqr1h.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 79C4684570 X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd-worker-8404 X-NC-CID: aFrXsBYPkCVEQJ4LrwLl3RYQyL8fpWZvBM0JvConcV0BgywiPv9z+Nlp X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (-) I support. Regards, Florian
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Feb 2025 16:55:47 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Feb 04 11:55:47 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46462 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tfMDD-0005Pn-He for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2025 11:55:47 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x330.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::330]:59641) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <efraim.flashner@HIDDEN>) id 1tfMDB-0005PS-Oz for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2025 11:55:46 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x330.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436202dd730so41736625e9.2 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 04 Feb 2025 08:55:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1738688139; x=1739292939; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-disposition:mime-version:mail-followup-to:message-id :subject:to:from:date:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=iz9A0MI3Zy0ZlxDp49E8w44cjf8PEvL8S+NXf6BO0w8=; b=OVnewwYGf0qhWlybj7fnXb9rUeVEl5bDRsacmtaE9+vBaggeT21EoSCvPo1iGOokut xBfXFbmphDraBmVQ25Uht8x48PPo3wMx30FqAt7pLGeJKyZjohEp99IcW40xOmVa7kKj /dJXtce3aSV8OYFsb2viBb5kxhxunypE9918DjcgBGQGaIRgnVHELi/u/dkfhslwOAOa TZQOerEqz9WRl7qzzIm1a8fog8gOVry2T73AAlL3vhk56N8yUqqSOZ0NzK4eSOoXnsAF unHGZwRQNKdIPvkA+uIt7Soj/fP9l+Keb1RlzzjbpY6wqAYln/JNToykejxWOnZ4Gfko dJUA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1738688139; x=1739292939; h=content-disposition:mime-version:mail-followup-to:message-id :subject:to:from:date:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=iz9A0MI3Zy0ZlxDp49E8w44cjf8PEvL8S+NXf6BO0w8=; b=oFFxUPy82IsMVsvgyeDE2OmWxvF6HP16oQAVxwjziqPht2vILNx5GogH5tGtChIYFx YySlvXIzQ9T1O9uyBC9f9wvNiZwx2uzAGRpjZNQcIvuOwL9jFNdNwNWPIE6E5sCVUjpF sBiJLObDP3S8P6sMrW1VWD+SyDfHXRFsE3aXyBWQ7td8mzVbNjhVbljvAk3tclxSrjP2 2vBnMWAsW09YWwlg4/BHmnAHLyjc/NLxPtJPSgwMNU9T6Cl7MgnB+NRrJJIRxnbg55iO yIaex1krfK0vrw5pBYPcg5lWkXt75uLxRkJ1VL/QQE/09UPT5S6Q3443lPyOup5bcfuN qjnw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwBuJvLO+rgmF+JbYSIRciyYwwVWiDxvbm2LQkGR3gg79Yd3BnO gTkqs+RK+n6kAa/CWbm00oXsbGGkRWibIwE8VvkU1B8T5zUCdVsCeS5DDg== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctZD+qnMwxbv2sLnIpy9R2ANsvKDbfFDqyVsq3PZE/m/6X9FBEB8XPV+IRbX6C VellOHTOBhiP5fwdjnGrS8wwWesHoTxnCRaQxU6RbdR/PNy5eEy/2kMptb7JNj11UK2tvcyojsN sYiN2UAxk6H0/I55J+7QUeqviyQ8ACz2sLyIqL8NQvNVThpLPw9qDCaBzxTCOuUKYS/zs/ZW6Lq eIt4RhyAjptLhv7JU9BLJu5gQYSl0CzqDXre5w5qXB7kN+Jf9EEC4G5pyCYInox2htdTAgFH+PQ BjUUBTfOyA4pVEo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH6booRvJMCCzQaFn5r1dPcuFmXFnyTqn/67BP4ydlNdONGCFvUhQKTHZMzD9X7lBHUETlk1w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3d9b:b0:434:effb:9f8a with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-438dc3c3554mr242144385e9.15.1738688139350; Tue, 04 Feb 2025 08:55:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([141.226.10.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38c5c1b5780sm16482460f8f.67.2025.02.04.08.55.37 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 04 Feb 2025 08:55:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 18:55:35 +0200 From: Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document =?utf-8?Q?proc?= =?utf-8?B?ZXNzIOKAkw==?= deliberation Message-ID: <Z6JGhwlowfKnxHpH@3900XT> Mail-Followup-To: Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8sBxZUEuzYD33eE3" Content-Disposition: inline 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: 0.1 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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: -0.9 (/) --8sBxZUEuzYD33eE3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support --=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 --8sBxZUEuzYD33eE3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEoov0DD5VE3JmLRT3Qarn3Mo9g1EFAmeiRoMACgkQQarn3Mo9 g1FqZQ//Zbal4kYKGCCh/I2drBGjwAF36n+KyMzywAt2yvEAWNwUud5jkjZiGjKR NXM3xPjETkicbyhip7xEtPydyhrzuk0IU8Vf5S5hxwT8yUMt1PCUqTRwNhCoin8M IUuB/qx79jKNKhvi9DU8ausxu2K2gpFtKIGH627I97P9F6H3A9w3OIV5zZkza2LP +FFK6P6i1xTyAGUtOCgfWS5cq56B0yD6YToBl/JAYRdbRMV9VFOPp5fvOuN/HwA9 NvqsOmdlCvNv5cuT+oquGxbdbhHWAIELaQz8U9IjpHM34B4shDOMQqxd9ogxVg86 BmRJpac1ljTossOyX92rdJrVlxQaRbLI7ntjL7F4jt5Fl1Ou40kizJhpLpVPbj0v IvILQLRDSO9ejOo+nne7HSSRqq285+j1qDfPcWkmur4b9bVTP0ap5R34A4aO6IIR XRoVmMctwBCY5H+ooMnNyp6wMeGM9pkgUhKLskgHzA/Th2TSwG8C5KJVqRAWzIjd blVy6rkidB9xc8M5GMEXw5WjvmRirB9DOFAQPTLtqP/d/s1k0MDBgnvlB1FwSn8A 92K2dWi6zpDe3sYnZTe6t1gD4i0wDBVGd/aUlxf6RDwWLrcGnMQpcUboBdvI2B7t DtVVgP3t+pvJ3ByqP1CboApaaiWWpWIdGuL/xVSKwhxnDVWjv7s= =jwto -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --8sBxZUEuzYD33eE3--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Feb 2025 16:04:39 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Feb 03 11:04:38 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40876 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1teywA-0007Gx-Iy for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Feb 2025 11:04:38 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::336]:46130) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1teyw7-0007G1-Dd for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Feb 2025 11:04:35 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-43622267b2eso46442025e9.0 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 03 Feb 2025 08:04:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1738598669; x=1739203469; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=zsuTes9wYj+kqMzUE2YP1PrzL6QA4tufIuSQ8L6MdFo=; b=iZd0s1yiZBaUo5M/YkiOuMU+cYsMls1z3K7UZ83DhXtek/zRCteOEsnPVSN+yZ5KqQ k6aJ5EFNLrIOgET4Zju6i0AkaD0Ty2X8FV6ftK9zHDTpAXg3G5AatpxkEjn199ay5305 2Lmyt3iqMuSbSx4wcbW54AfSn/uT/arygzrObSComdnifIFQqr5SZmBe5JlxA8OgeZnO QRCp4sci57R1jpqjF3H2HZwDgOJv6vuqZMJoruSBfJZ3IN+04FJ8oq5AIJFBbCQQAEbo izSv1PAvzKz2o1VAtXZ2a/RgnLLOYk/yaAoTnH5pvSiq1SVjMn15cO3k5D8TOPptxg4v +Wmw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1738598669; x=1739203469; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=zsuTes9wYj+kqMzUE2YP1PrzL6QA4tufIuSQ8L6MdFo=; b=lj2H+eOyvzC/YbS3sdHxxn+j48csy3h2uZybNWRLyTIp4+W8UP38dL1gWITDUerxW6 EWoD/diOvkwTMVJGrUCeqIbVGUDdxa4mU3J3c8gi78Wvd8HIbIWKyvS8FXf1PoGepXRj E3YDvhfMWeyWH+TXcH4YZyLiz9DvgP9fdd1X+5NUhDRUkWhr0uebrcGc8x49Vs05xVb6 1DcymvmVy00CDzqc6PzRchYdgKCXoGy3cmcVPa6Gu1IH1X/sTVY/kamzRLNNwUZxNGAb nx4q0Re/M/3bucAe+XRv8RCzvKkbhdefkfB3HjBCWM+AihIRI4suDrnGeKp2i3Y6tYhv U2SQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWbG0f3IVpyd7P7jGfGn2p8uBHXM0ojzB278zBZQOdZLWgrnRXatXTCptXP1rMajZAskZwP4w==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywob6ece2sLjFa0seoitisfcRZ5cgwoJTKjl9yd2lcpVP1j420/ KoP/k53DNxXr7S2GYVP7cdpRA/LRaFtBqumaFBRG8ty17LzLRnd+GD7eM8MU X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvFNNg/Gztogimr7BUF2gcqvnAez/Z6uu/elInfCKcKfhU46w+zbHRY/R45eZW Krr8gzymeBrx5lM3zYmAEd3YO4dkf28Nqq1W7CRvNsquIPTwYSxYRRNKmeSYq9ijhvHuBSh8tZn S5sVKCvnPAis5EkmhlIQvFZc8+AbRApoqo381+Nhwd9Q0i0gf3SBW/oFYkKmwxg5+EbCW1azicQ 7tA2G5KdXAixhe/sxbQQ/6gyyyYLeyz7PR4ImMsIs2vmxXkRY427M+D1BGNTBbZAW+KREdg4V9P OxbOIFS1LS9xAplFtDvP10sbaaJXMLAjte1HjFq96SZH5jk8t9pJzUUvUrTs1sw0QuadMjfmY7y I X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE3C3vTBx1DYjA/7HrxT23ioNTpGyV33Rg1WrHCj0+wDIwcHNeuDHpbExzNDzL3sWChonhsfg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6d86:0:b0:38a:873f:e31f with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38c5194d20fmr17819713f8f.1.1738598668987; Mon, 03 Feb 2025 08:04:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-40.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr. [194.254.61.40]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-438dcc26cefsm194231815e9.13.2025.02.03.08.04.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 03 Feb 2025 08:04:28 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: =?utf-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9?= Batista <nandre@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [bug#74736] Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation In-Reply-To: <Z5vx_SP3yOlPqbBn@andel> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <Z5vx_SP3yOlPqbBn@andel> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2025 16:46:02 +0100 Message-ID: <87zfj38211.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: 74736 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 Thu, 30 Jan 2025 at 18:42, Andr=C3=A9 Batista <nandre@HIDDEN> wrote: >> The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members=E2=80=93as= of the >> start of the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D=E2=80=93send a reply,= and (2) no one >> disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*. > > So authors and sponsors are excluded from the deliberation's counting? Well, for now, the count is =C2=AB at least 25% of all team members =C2=BB therefore if author(s) and sponsor(s) are part of some teams, their reply counts in these 25%. Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Feb 2025 15:33:31 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Feb 03 10:33:31 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40801 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1teyS3-0005m9-2q for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:33:31 -0500 Received: from fout-a7-smtp.messagingengine.com ([103.168.172.150]:49529) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <samplet@HIDDEN>) id 1teyRz-0005lk-Uu for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:33:29 -0500 Received: from phl-compute-01.internal (phl-compute-01.phl.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A5513801DD; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 10:33:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-02 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-01.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:33:20 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ngyro.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1738596800; x=1738683200; bh=YHEh1nfpfE iDdfuXNQZ489xoCrOtW44AtPzU3j/Qx6A=; b=BBFUjZJbcTeDmkkWfflvzgRuyj iUWTxTapeOUF4K7zR7GKTCr/JaQA+cFX72OcQcmXV32heaO8QxG8anroOybWvaFh 5CTrKcs1TpeSSs+DkjECYPYGL7ygqApGBmjL4ne0a6Wk9R6WgqYWS7fLRt5ACm6v NIbdez8gcotuffwb+6c1N7J3TSLe4Df9P2cpTsgwLpmRNBRZ3K1pd2XEYff2D54U 7Y0uv7AEzTFAqnv1NIJBVqhPWmKAJlbNucMjDvbSKf1Nclh5EyltaThNwUhAo8Wr cR1vIZuXmUzM8jbf7J0s+yDE/YuKG0XhoPAMTkc4Cnsi+IVsZrbJpMmJl9Wg== 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:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1738596800; x=1738683200; bh=YHEh1nfpfEiDdfuXNQZ489xoCrOtW44AtPz U3j/Qx6A=; b=arwxG3bN7m6TbdfyJBl36SHhCWUj6YbVs5dKZS8JmVpdsB/r2Hf VdWtyRajnxS4OoIdAoT2tyWuULF/GIsaJBblhf/jWCQcKFn4zL1B2qxxr26hJ2Hr XEZNReEGaXQWra4UHr0iOmQ5vdzcZ3WNmN9BFOCESos+JnDDqaEk6zDft1wzZfSk eC+U0GThk2cTn5lCYriWovsqDCK6zpm68W2e+tTxyLXCw/lIgF5jk2C/QfpiKrEC phjz5LcR9sjyprJbuLw3ox19vDZeevE9cT6rdcrmuZUdT9ENd33jwk6hmi3TiAqd b7zanATpwovFGv7yLPjgawELHMvrBu/WnHw== X-ME-Sender: <xms:v-GgZz2L9075ZAQ25_bZy9AmQS7E0w3d16ikfkkR5IbMhxb0KhXFkQ> <xme:v-GgZyEzsZBmetOE2801oLvvxltb4AxVsIAV-MIQ-mIUTaY68BNYjjF2YmSNXV-8n tqs60YMvgzn3tKdlg> X-ME-Received: <xmr:v-GgZz7DLodRReMYrxS6mIRHRoy3TPa63Xa6QcbIVbNVKZDlsOLCRBUVYA> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgddujeeljecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdp uffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhephffvve fujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttdertdenucfhrhhomhepvfhimhhothhhhicuufgrmhhp lhgvuceoshgrmhhplhgvthesnhhghihrohdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepke dugeffgeejgeevfffhueeflefhudeltdehheevheeikedtieffheehieekuddvnecuvehl uhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepshgrmhhplhgvth esnhhghihrohdrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepvddpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhht pdhrtghpthhtohepjeegjeefieesuggvsggsuhhgshdrghhnuhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtth hopeiiihhmohhnrdhtohhuthhouhhnvgesghhmrghilhdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:v-GgZ41BXphgOjTM1ZJF9Ug335pfvwqCXU_dHRdnGNWVs1o62HTKtg> <xmx:v-GgZ2FbRn8RfArJcoSb8nqOLakDQI0i6B2WEtac-WKa6ZJC6ifMhw> <xmx:v-GgZ5-qYEOH3VTVrc7Fce8l_U_BUz1hmhlX1Iq1gvvdogUFWw0rUA> <xmx:v-GgZzkRpSgIwUJHu_YKGWAmJRj1QVW8vedWj-ID8903P8bnT6evdw> <xmx:wOGgZ7QTo0u71h3Dg7FcZMWZ1vH-JHIV3m4lVV6K6mNhn5K6RImxHMa_> Feedback-ID: i4721425c:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 10:33:19 -0500 (EST) From: Timothy Sample <samplet@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:49:55 +0100") References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2025 09:33:19 -0600 Message-ID: <87ed0ft54w.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 (-) Hi Simon, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: > If you have commit access and not yet a member of any team, please > consider to join one. Since we are bootstrapping the process, your > reply matters too. :-) This is my case, sadly. Be that as it may, the GCD process looks very good to me. I support. -- Tim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Feb 2025 09:16:00 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 01 04:15:59 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56345 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1te9bb-0000Db-M2 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2025 04:15:59 -0500 Received: from mout-p-201.mailbox.org ([2001:67c:2050:0:465::201]:47890) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <lars@HIDDEN>) id 1te9bY-0000DE-OB for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2025 04:15:57 -0500 Received: from smtp2.mailbox.org (smtp2.mailbox.org [IPv6:2001:67c:2050:b231:465::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mout-p-201.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4YlRv65r27z9tTG; Sat, 1 Feb 2025 10:15:46 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6xq.net; s=MBO0001; t=1738401346; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=a9gxN3PLd5yYznYYzmc3XuM2agou3YQCXxgIxv/nAUI=; b=DaQYMsG3PEKGOUa+Sa2wJyLXgi33gkAu/wmMQ13LS+2A5p30qfAzKCYTEYvGjKeaKdMgLv tmvahvRCTomUY0Y4vKlCc3SsBaCHKO5zgw6xlQNQFKBlm1aaOu6rmFSkiyTwjMy99WU22J 9f8J2AT1ulXUAK/3fqEBd/v8Bn2hp9sI0ap5zS1WhQaz9RVD/LmRxTZ5rdCu7CtM3eJgo8 Y2KcuGBJ/kZ89Gz2Ch4lFGrfnW46cKT37bGMAxzYnoD1XNHgUlfkKy7MtYgx/rgN4VfapY rpEyXGEQGRrAsP0/y4OTsEdLym7m+JkRxrNKeg50P9CFEaMirGl59SiScNWAkw== Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2025 10:15:43 +0100 From: Lars-Dominik Braun <lars@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [FWD] Guix Consensus =?utf-8?Q?Documen?= =?utf-8?Q?t_process_=E2=80=93?= deliberation Message-ID: <Z53mP58PMPi-7jq4@HIDDEN> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4YlRv65r27z9tTG X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 (-) Hi, > If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by > email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org your reply, either: > > • I support; > • I accept; > • I disapprove. I support this GCD. Lars
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Jan 2025 09:16:31 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 31 04:16:31 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49964 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tdn8S-0006LY-OE for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2025 04:16:31 -0500 Received: from out-187.mta1.migadu.com ([95.215.58.187]:44641) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <andrew@HIDDEN>) id 1tdn8N-0006LF-Pz for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2025 04:16:23 -0500 X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@HIDDEN and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=trop.in; s=key1; t=1738314973; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3G5iCRDSZf3lghfplOuz+UB2BemT1N3gWwtHedfGL8o=; b=Nf12Lq/yUkil1VGWHrVrxww98xPZVnY0jPC1eWk3gi1VTGmMMnC4VU4sv4Fm78tqhjIacO M9g501alIu9ZTlIMZM9AhjTfPAtHlf6vFDSDqvCpcEWSR1ohiJDurN6+I1Y1ps232NjZGV vvWxpQ/YFHrE1KGUtdoOfw4xaWKHlJHPaeNrPmLMFcG+9WS61A9IXjtEgjJI8ULYwJfRLd 0mP1HH/K6rsvbUIqVejVn1dMSJdhd1L34IKQMAnyVN+gUm+taHcJsNLKG05IjLq4vtmPJx i57QR1ykkVq4T7i5PW0atUD0PNyNo43s8FZ9SDQDFO00jURiqe3pmfl/Jx4TkQ== From: Andrew Tropin <andrew@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, info-guix@HIDDEN, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2025 13:16:07 +0400 Message-ID: <871pwj4a3s.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2025-01-22 20:44, Simon Tournier wrote: > Hi all, > > Here is the Guix Consensus Document (GCD) process which implements how > we will collectively make decision on *significant* changes. Since it > bootstraps the process, it=E2=80=99s important to have a common understan= ding of > it. > > If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by > email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org your reply, either: > > =E2=80=A2 I support; > =E2=80=A2 I accept; > =E2=80=A2 I disapprove. > > If you have commit access and not yet a member of any team, please > consider to join one. Since we are bootstrapping the process, your > reply matters too. :-) > > The Deliberation Period ends on February, 5th everywhere on Earth. > > Note that the Discussion Period is now done. Therefore, if you accept > with strong concerns, please provide a summary (5-10 lines) that will be > included in the final document. > > If someone disapproves, please explicitly point which major comment you > did that had not been included in this final document. > > Attached the GCD file and the template file. Below various milestones if > you need more context. > > Thanks for all the comments! I=E2=80=99m personally happy with this outc= ome. :-) > > Cheers, > simon > > -- > title: Guix Consensus Document Process > id: 001 > status: submitted > discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736 > authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s > sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus > date: 2025-12-08 > SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only > --- > > # Summary > > This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the > GNU Guix project, later referenced as either Guix or =E2=80=9Cthe project= =E2=80=9C, for > brevity. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and > structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes affecting > the project. It aims to draw the attention of community members on > important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to weigh > in. > > # Motivation > > Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer revie= w, > and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so does the > stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to keep track of > all of them. > > The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is > *significant* enough to require attention from the community at large and > if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community > discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal. > > A change may be deemed *significant* when it could only be reverted at a > high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to disrupt > user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include: > > - changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces; > - adding or removing a `guix` sub-command; > - changing the channel mechanism; > - changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the > deprecation policy, or this very document; > - changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing > lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, and so > on). > > # Detailed Design > > ## When to Follow This Process > > The GCD process applies only to *significant* changes, which include: > > - changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on > (command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces); > - big restructuring of packages; > - hard to revert changes; > - significant project infrastructure or workflow changes; > - governance or changes to the way we collaborate. > > Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an > GCD first. > > Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require a GCD; examples include: > > - adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages; > - fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change interface= s; > - updating the manual, updating translations; > - changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure in= a > user-invisible way. > > These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described in > the [=E2=80=9DContributing=E2=80=9C section of the GNU Guix Reference > Manual](https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Contributing.html). > > # How the Process Works > > ## Getting Started > > 1. Clone > https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git > 2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name` is a > short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number. > 3. Write your GCD following the template structure. The GCD must describe > a concrete idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even if not all > details are known; the GCD must not be a brainstorming session or a > vague idea but a concrete proposal. If it intends to deprecate a > previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so. > 4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`. > 5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*: one > or more people who will support the GCD and participate in discussions > by your side (see below). > > The GCD is now in *draft* state and will be *submitted* once it has at > least one sponsor in addition to the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission = Period=E2=80=9D > below. > > ## Roles > > - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD. > Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its > conclusion. > > - A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see > below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the GCD > by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments to > help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as timekeepers. = As > a sponsor, please make sure that all participants have the time and > space for expressing their comments. > > Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently > familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommende= d, but not > mandatory, to be a team member. > > - A *team member* is the member of a team, as defined in the [Teams > section of the GNU Guix Reference > Manual](https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Teams.html). > Currently, the list of teams and their members is maintained in the > file `etc/teams.scm` in the [GNU Guix > repository](https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/etc/teams= .scm) > > - A *contributor* is a person who has been participating in Guix > activities, for instance by writing or reviewing code, by supporting > users on fora, or by contributing to translations. > > ## Communication Channels > > - The *draft* is sent by email to `guix-devel@HIDDEN`. >=20=20 > - Once *submitted*, the GCD is announced to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and disc= ussed > using the assigned issue number. >=20=20=20=20 > - The *final* document is published to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and the > deliberating replies are sent to the assigned issue number. > > ## Timeline > > A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below, > consisting of several *periods*. > > ``` > draft submitted final > +--------------------+ +---------------------+ +--------------------= -+ > | Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period= | > | (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 day= s) | > +--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +--------------------= -+ > : : : | > : v : | > : cancelled v | > : o-----------o | > +- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X > o-----------o | > V > o----------o > | Accepted | > o----------o > ``` > > The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration. > > ### Submission Period (up to 7 days) > > Anyone can author and propose a GCD as a regular patch and look for > sponsors (see =E2=80=9CRoles=E2=80=9D). The GCD is *submitted* once one = or more people > have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor= =E2=80=9D; it is > *cancelled* if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next st= ep > is the *discussion period*. > > Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again > later (under a new GCD number). > > ### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days) > > Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the > community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions > incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to > share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being > included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document. > > When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start of t= he > discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and announce > the start of the *deliberation period*. If the authors fail to do so, the > deliberation period automatically starts 60 days after the start of the > discussion period based on the latest version provided by the author(s). > > ### Deliberation Period (14 days) > > Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Makin= g=E2=80=9D below. > > The *deliberation period* starts when the authors publish a final version > of the GCD at `info-guix@HIDDEN`. Anyone who is a team member is a > deliberating member and is encouraged to contribute to the deliberation. > > Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send one > of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD: > > - =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal; > - =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementa= tion of the > proposal; > - =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementa= tion of the > proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made constructi= ve > comments during the discussion period. > > The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members=E2=80=93as = of the > start of the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D=E2=80=93send a reply, = and (2) no one > disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*. > > GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean the > proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all the > participants consent to its implementation. > > Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it could > mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in the GCD a= re > accepted by the community. > > ## Decision Making > > Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build > consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions that > everyone can live with. > > Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns are > actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member > disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives, > proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo. > > To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer > details, you are encouraged to read > <https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>. > > ## Merging GCDs > > Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a person with commit rights merges t= he > GCD following these steps: > > 1. Fill in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the `statu= s` > to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the discussion in the > `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if previously-accepted > GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the `status` header > accordingly with `deprecated`); > 2. Commit everything; > 3. Announce the publication of the GCD. > > All the GCDs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons > Attribution-ShareAlike > 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the [GNU > Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover > Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html) > or (at your option) any later version. > > ## GCD Template > > The expected structure of GCDs is captured by the template file > `000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown syntax. > > ## Cost of Reverting > > Not applicable. Please note that the GCD process described in this > document can be amended by subsequent GCDs. > > ## Drawbacks > > There is a risk that the additional process may hinder or burden > contributions, potentially causing more harm than good. We should stay > alert that the process is only a way to help contribution, not an end in > itself. > > Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will > collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices and > notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon, and > solicit opinions from those who remained silent. > > ## Open Issues > > There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process. > While we want to ensure that technical changes affecting users are > well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become un= duly > burdensome. This is a delicate balance which will require care to mainta= in > moving forward. > -- > > -- > title: <Name Of The Proposal> > id: <the next available number> > status: <draft|submitted|accepted|withdrawn|deprecated> > discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/<number assigned by issue tracker> > authors: <Author Name> > sponsors: <Sponsor Name> > date: <date when the discussion period starts> > SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only > --- > > # Summary > > A one-paragraph explanation: motivation and proposed solution. > > # Motivation > > Describe the problem(s) this GCD attempts to address as clearly as possib= le > and optionally give an example. Explain how the status quo is insufficie= nt or > not ideal. > > # Detailed Design > > Main part. The sections compares this solution to other options, includi= ng > the status quo, and describes the various tradeoffs in this space. Expla= in > details, corner cases, provide examples. Explain it so that someone fami= liar > can understand. > > It is best to exemplify, including with contrived examples. If the Motiva= tion > section describes something that is hard to do without this proposal, thi= s is > a good place to show how easy that thing is to do with the proposed solut= ion. > > ## Cost of Reverting > > This section explains the impact on users and/or community members of the > proposed change, and estimates the effort it would take to revert it. > > For code changes, assess the expected impact on existing code or processe= s on > the following scale: > > 0. No incompatibility > 1. Incompatible only in extremely rare cases (corner cases) > 2. Incompatible in rare cases (only visible to advanced users) > 3. Unavoidable incompatibility (affecting most) > > Describe the migration path and consider how to follow the Deprecation Po= licy > of the project. > > For non-coding activities such as processes of the project, similarly exp= lain > what impact they will have on workflows. > > How will your proposed change evolve over time? What is the cost of chan= ging > or reverting the approach later? > > # Drawbacks and Open Issues > > At submission time, be upfront about open issues so others in the communi= ty > can help. > > At the end of the process, this section might be empty. If not, please be > explicit with the known issues and potential directions to address them. > -- > > PS: The very first draft had been sent more than one year ago [1,2]. > Then we discussed this topics at Guix Days 2024 [3]. No=C3=A9 resumed > [4] on December (more than 40 days ago) and several updates had been > sent to guix-devel; see v5 [5], v6 [6], v7 [7] etc. v10 [8]. A > consensus had been reached. > > The discussion is tracked in: > > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736 > > > 1: Request-For-Comment process: concrete implementation > Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> > Tue, 31 Oct 2023 12:14:42 +0100 > id:87h6m7yrfh.fsf@HIDDEN > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-10 > https://yhetil.org/guix/87h6m7yrfh.fsf@HIDDEN > > 2: [bug#66844] [PATCH 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. > Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> > Tue, 31 Oct 2023 12:05:22 +0100 > id:cover.1698747252.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/66844 > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/cover.1698747252.git.zimon.toutoune@gma= il.com > https://yhetil.org/guix/cover.1698747252.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN > > 3: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix/maintenance.git/tree/doc/guix-d= ays-2024/governance.org?id=3D12a5d469852a008c314c5f30d17ce60f5a954325 > > 4: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. > No=C3=A9 Lopez via Guix-patches via <guix-patches@HIDDEN> > Sun, 08 Dec 2024 13:29:52 +0100 > id:cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736 > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN > https://yhetil.org/guix/cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN > > 5: Request-For-Comment process: concrete implementation (v5) > Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> > Fri, 03 Jan 2025 19:38:01 +0100 > id:87ttafn3p2.fsf@HIDDEN > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2025-01 > https://yhetil.org/guix/87ttafn3p2.fsf@HIDDEN > > 6: Re: Request-For-Comment process: concrete implementation (v5) > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> > Tue, 07 Jan 2025 11:40:11 +0100 > id:87zfk229h0.fsf@HIDDEN > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2025-01 > https://yhetil.org/guix/87zfk229h0.fsf@HIDDEN > > 7: Guix Common Document process (v7) (was: Request-For-Comment, RFC) > Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> > Fri, 10 Jan 2025 01:07:47 +0100 > id:87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2025-01 > https://yhetil.org/guix/87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN > > 8: Guix Consensus Document process (v10) > Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> > Fri, 17 Jan 2025 02:06:23 +0100 > id:87bjw6mepc.fsf@HIDDEN > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2025-01 > https://yhetil.org/guix/87bjw6mepc.fsf@HIDDEN I support. Thank you very much for all the effort, GCD looks really good. P.S. The first reply was marked as spam by debbugs, this is a second attempt to send it. --=20 Best regards, Andrew Tropin --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 LS0tLS1CRUdJTiBQR1AgU0lHTkFUVVJFLS0tLS0KCmlRSXpCQUVCQ2dBZEZpRUVLRUdheGxBNGRF REg2Uy82SWdqU0NWakIzckFGQW1lY1hNY0FDZ2tRSWdqU0NWakIKM3JDRXNRLy9ZWEFHSHdGQnVn endQd0pUYXpFRm1MaEZSTGx5ai9UK3dkY0N3bkVtdkJ2K2VkamU2bjFLNmY5LwpYOEtCa09oMEw1 OGE1NjR3TzRkR0RxV2JFWkRYd01OdlZqek1Dd3ZCaDg0NzJmVjBNWVpubEV5T2NxOE9tNjNGClI4 U0lhd0hFejZqUHAyUGlOaGZYcGljOS9oSDlnQ29jSUJRN3NnWEEwbFNJZDJXMDQvaTErWm0xUXRR ZWhRNDQKNExFdEduSUxHYkhpWUFlS1BQejd4Z1kxTkNaMmw3Q2FOaHc2elBzb3JvVEo3N3QvOGdE QTFLZ1R2WUF6NkhMcgppcXlxYWhWN09oUHQ1ekhVRlV0cGpSdnJXdkdoTjBiSStQbEdmL1NPTm1H QWpoLzFmWVhvV3lvMjlOY2RqL2hYCkhpdCsrSjFWZ1NMVyszTUcwWU5uSHFScUh4RE1WZmtibTRm VDNCcGxQSzByRHQ4b0JSU2Z6MFl1VVVPYVNoRGkKRWVmM3B6ZW5JY1ZWZm12eERLbmlHMVAyOE1D STZPaVZVT0VCOVc4ZHBHVGRZcnJlTU5Pa3RhMjJlQ2pYNFI0Vwp0M2VFbk5xRHdiMmNKSERyU3RU S243blFDaUJ1MXk4Yk9XOU1uQ0hra21ndzNPYVU4UC92TE9RSTFNQXBoaFFUCkR6OUtxblJNTFg2 cWVXRWRwa0pOcFJsUm1xUmNwaXZERjdWVFBJSWRBRk1JbEJIbWNPR2RTbVNIb1ZIa2crMFoKWG1V VXBZaW5hMGtVSkdsS0dvYkoxUDdSc0g0UDJPbXN0VkJ0RnQ1OEt2RGpFTHRZNHB6eDdGVlF6aGNX bUJJbQo5VWtqZXNGWlJtTGM2S0FnanJ1dVRWc09tUklzTFlRQ1NSZHhqdU1pZE9iekNxRzZMUzA9 Cj1ERWR2Ci0tLS0tRU5EIFBHUCBTSUdOQVRVUkUtLS0tLQ== --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Jan 2025 21:42:35 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 30 16:42:35 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48229 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tdcJ1-0006Ug-ES for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 16:42:35 -0500 Received: from mx0.riseup.net ([198.252.153.6]:36030) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <nandre@HIDDEN>) id 1tdcIy-0006UL-Ac for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 16:42:33 -0500 Received: from fews02-sea.riseup.net (fews02-sea-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.112]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx0.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4YkXYZ1BNLz9wFN; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 21:42:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1738273346; bh=aVf2pea7eSVRtd5qnkR4zpIZtPP70LqWupXlhxnELvs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=BPW1sGE/uFUUy+4PJq/yGBKvIhEwjcbM4DPMCvYL29l1VubMg3HOo7zg591BdV98E LwtsNSLHABUKH6H7p2bAGhK4hL6aqgabB8sJx+ZWs5CKt9sHNmFDOMIAMa4MDaJJCt Vz4QJHVI6zG/66xWuS7vNTWLQVCr0GVYFtzXTCRA= X-Riseup-User-ID: 56A320746455B131E4B444A6802A1580F5B99EA26F845484AB28EE85A79FDF70 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews02-sea.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YkXYX6RFJzFplp; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 21:42:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 18:42:20 -0300 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9?= Batista <nandre@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document =?utf-8?Q?proc?= =?utf-8?B?ZXNzIOKAkw==?= deliberation Message-ID: <Z5vx_SP3yOlPqbBn@andel> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-) Hi Guix! qua 22 jan 2025 às 20:44:08 (1737589448), zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN enviou: > Hi all, > > Here is the Guix Consensus Document (GCD) process which implements how > we will collectively make decision on *significant* changes. Since it > bootstraps the process, it’s important to have a common understanding of > it. > > If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by > email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org your reply, either: > > • I support; > • I accept; > • I disapprove. > I support. (...) > > The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members–as of the > start of the “Deliberation Period”–send a reply, and (2) no one > disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*. So authors and sponsors are excluded from the deliberation's counting? Congrats on moving this forward!
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jan 2025 04:11:33 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 28 23:11:33 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39531 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tczQL-0004MN-CN for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 23:11:33 -0500 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:43605) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <bavier@HIDDEN>) id 1tczQH-0004M5-AU for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 23:11:30 -0500 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6882C240101 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 29 Jan 2025 05:11:22 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1738123882; bh=FVR7Klv/CSHBc0aZns3HLHrLRqjQoxAuMz/Omv97pIo=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From; b=es+5UewGMyPsYD8jVPOt9rt2wuhKAykinzy/1FkQXa7IhkqqiaJ+jQUtGlBDc+WrN r7619XoFlVEv0Mb2HIdoK2hay11dOYBNWWo58twdedatSYawZFgGiNc2HoflIL3vvB /zy/r+i8EIykh2pnNwDgI6R5JiSMBp2IEt/fmFo2YEvGNTN5ia2x6b5rSnmStzDQ+M 22D73KVn6Iz7J7tXNeVTtPeyDaPB/skoJABd0K/TG+wiafaZVynUlUqLjs2iFdFLEW Mag1H5sDcBzVb9JwF3EE03Stp+lEPrR6kaIqBLolLZYIekE/huwY3db9KHFhFCJiAC l/Ed6Argkz+iQ== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4YjTHF5FYhz9rxD for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 29 Jan 2025 05:11:21 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <0a5b28e1-7d59-4996-8a90-2f3ba06f8bcd@HIDDEN> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2025 04:11:20 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_Guix_Consensus_Document_process_=E2=80=93_deliberat?= =?UTF-8?Q?ion?= To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Content-Language: en-US From: Eric Bavier <bavier@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (---) I support On 1/22/25 13:44, Simon Tournier wrote: > Hi all, > > Here is the Guix Consensus Document (GCD) process which implements how > we will collectively make decision on *significant* changes. Since it > bootstraps the process, it’s important to have a common understanding of > it. > > If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by > email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org your reply, either: > > • I support; > • I accept; > • I disapprove. >
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jan 2025 02:15:29 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 28 21:15:29 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39338 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tcxc0-0007Tv-VI for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 21:15:29 -0500 Received: from fout-a4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([103.168.172.147]:39039) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ian@HIDDEN>) id 1tcxby-0007Tf-Lp for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 21:15:27 -0500 Received: from phl-compute-02.internal (phl-compute-02.phl.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEB4A1380ED7 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 21:15:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-02 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-02.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 28 Jan 2025 21:15:20 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=retrospec.tv; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date:date :from:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1738116920; x=1738203320; bh=UW8nQ6za91 aJrDSl7OrpKCd/9sw55xd8KtFVmt3hc04=; b=YHLn9elUijYwAxVLNqx25xf42p xD8cABxxeQOD+JsQmoZ+/92v9t1oEQ6iH1bAkK7wc9f61U6sb+zQnPRy2PAJI77G yBfGmZzvVubljX0m7u4+Angv63mC5CEVWdOpQOfQ7nx99v+6J3eGc2B9QR/LOBIB cWzapgq+i9wdYFeyUqwJSBHGu1jQ2lZKNbmi5LHwHJEH0l7cPTlw7KpwTkqsTNaC WNtLFv1IygACoW853l+DyqXFtptHiQiQFxVAIzfyMkrqWpEQ9gbyKNbM0JU5X4nD m8V1Z+50tbCXpWvpFLQY5pR+Rt1IflOLwW5r88WmP3EgAP6ZwdcLHMgSF6Sg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1738116920; x=1738203320; bh=UW8nQ6za91aJrDSl7OrpKCd/9sw55xd8KtF Vmt3hc04=; b=GoTRocMVu9OS5pDsWDT8G+2EGLW1aGAre7DtemS76AXrxG2u95L rP3EAXSWJtxeWPpYat5tOaaUoy5eyYA8qMvb32+Flwid3Xqyfv3w1F6jVu6MuJ7j 6FRYkuJP2CZj6CUlMshC0Bkk8ezQV3H5zXS4TjhY/InTaqSO/vEtqOdeXR63W6ja j9IcNdeT37ARhtlPouCUgvsTGP6XWn3GkF7iuTs2jIh6jQtvjTucK7NaTnjBwzyO pVJI86P44HsFf/uHjrk8UR3iKLU1HJ129Yp9PJ3HGWVymv2/nBeu1sU8cZNyURBL 5jNppt2n1DuiQuJ42ViGgkyBImNqYFuiJXg== X-ME-Sender: <xms:OI-ZZ1Fe8AQP9K4F4d9HVSTbSt9YpaRYJlzTmQUKGljip-Bd4zq0dA> <xme:OI-ZZ6UKt4dc8aM9eEdarLKYTiZ_leVyfDtklUvlhqODEyaNbsJxRB4dfrFWAkoJ0 zhLTXLpP_lrzHRRuQ> X-ME-Received: <xmr:OI-ZZ3Ie_Bk6xp5oLFUWDRFHlKc4T_Uz9MpaNlenIe8aSiVhSp_v3VDIqrvqU70gysroi36M800py-tB1eXjK_1E78gWxemSP9eUCOc> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgddujeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefhvffufg ffkfggtgfgsehtqhertddtreejnecuhfhrohhmpefkrghnucfguhhrvgcuoehirghnsehr vghtrhhoshhpvggtrdhtvheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepieeffeekkeegtedutdeite egudefgedtieevueeftdeggefgjeeludevjeevvdejnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgep tdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepihgrnhesrhgvthhrohhsphgvtgdrthhvpd hnsggprhgtphhtthhopedupdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopeejgeej feeiseguvggssghughhsrdhgnhhurdhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:OI-ZZ7HOrsWtMszLDlW72-yHEV2iXoTPmR-ykP_iBmCezt5MMjGQWA> <xmx:OI-ZZ7XLkH4fNgYCHQIPDKgMs4-vMj14X4u_-TiHK62dg5Mhc6s8Sg> <xmx:OI-ZZ2P2bTzrEOG67INMT6hif5ZkFgBa7SyDoI_oI73OhmRW4w97GA> <xmx:OI-ZZ61rEPaHFpD2BNpC9gEbb3URf63frWtQulSUv-4RjrMsFCx3VQ> <xmx:OI-ZZyef1Pc59ih_r7N-pdLvJZnYB4hajb2Zbw1ExXK6BPv1ZFtUCjXx> Feedback-ID: id9014242:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 21:15:20 -0500 (EST) From: Ian Eure <ian@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. User-Agent: mu4e 1.12.7; emacs 29.4 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 18:13:45 -0800 Message-ID: <87ed0mgyee.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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: -1.2 (-) =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I support. I think we=E2=80=99re likely to encounter some rough edges that require twe= aks, but this is a good starting point, and I=E2=80=99d rather have the str= ucture than not. We=E2=80=99re likely going to need tooling to support this, as I don=E2=80= =99t think there=E2=80=99s anything to count up votes at the moment, and so= meone=E2=80=99s vote may change over the course of the discussion and delib= eration phases. -- Ian =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJFBAEBCAAvFiEEaYCpuVICqhHrHYkihJmsiPGnHPIFAmeZjzYRHGlhbkByZXRy b3NwZWMudHYACgkQhJmsiPGnHPKTIQ//QT/cwFNL/ehOIitgenF3MgPM3vWZjgpB bA7pnm0KI0s3jhho06yZDxKSkZ6r/j6FsyDMWfuioHv9e6K8tuDssdsdY0oqg+xC 6MYscii9lhuJzT2JA2Xb/iBJwfehDa4iLP8ZJ1JWhAcXZEdBF0CU0jovrLu6vNTV r8ZkLqbzoQT7gwZIo9KhvVrgtDmn/MSb+Yipl0lyja3KwcE3RQePSaTiJ4tg7sem HnPY/8fQbnR783UrKYkI3AAAltAwLFNNyU6JCrg+UJHyd0QeB2cobhI1HrLa9h3z kQJeVG5LYF8zo4I9CMH5dBIGyvI1/BrMyu+4AlQtRM++ISzlxLonpA5c988Vk9Pw BY+icL+M3RHui4BR+T4Fpbsy3F9jWh2u+1qtvoFz4u5rKm8vQGX1W2Y4qT4GmMkS 6B8q8qOh3d9O/hGqphtkIZz+73rJSGoFk3MCEqI8eWs8iJcY94dskIfFg5Nhl+JD p8T5rOXznVlGUAPli5Wf9oLGFLLka6bjgW5hD1OqCYd7nBUw8ZJyshRVgqT6qI3q 2H96RW/Yc8UgB2/OGkGDhjLDc6AQJTzzrDu9HHoNQxWVSrc/JqpMIMl+kvHmcvqu lgq96B5XMa6+6bEG5aSExJ158GALn7Uslt5g6DksufyegihXh8ytwGNSHeChh4BP RMRxa6vdqWE=3D =3D0kyZ =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Jan 2025 19:01:26 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 28 14:01:26 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38570 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tcqpx-0000aJ-AY for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 14:01:26 -0500 Received: from mail01.noris.net ([62.128.1.221]:40491) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>) id 1tcqpt-0000ZO-IP for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 14:01:23 -0500 Received: from p5b394c8d.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([91.57.76.141] helo=hermia.goebel-consult.de) by mail01.noris.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>) id 1tcqpr-0001es-Si; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 20:01:19 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hermia.goebel-consult.de [192.168.110.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by hermia.goebel-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CC37602A1; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 20:01:16 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <0af9a7d0-c467-4b92-82a1-81c5bf282bad@HIDDEN> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 20:01:15 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [bug#74736] I accept To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <335834ca-314c-4d9c-b82e-381cf9e18653@HIDDEN> <877c6gjx69.fsf@HIDDEN> From: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN> Content-Language: de-DE, en-US Autocrypt: addr=h.goebel@HIDDEN; keydata= xsFNBFJQM3oBEACiUXmMppc3+A7JpF3lPz8O/mRhfz1U6F4EOTlacTrCcm7Xg5U2JsPPNapV r5+vHnKBK+xbaX3s/A/G+SwrUZhi1X1HRnSNY1CqL8CT7rZmOtfjg4ExnOuCjie2bKhb9JKm lJ7MrNimIbNQoX1mRcQ4VMEflhyWfaPGbT73siuMkbr020ExhzW8T18JIC01SgWMULYMBXOB oGY21am/vaTFCK8bym1P4HVN8i64uOWL0agkAMHbju6SZtG2fYJ68eS3P/97bXRg1pveEdpa FgaFZhquecw4WdedwLwt1xNcjAg/p6tN73W3asEZTgMHa+iNzbJgcyhWpci09wQZfZ1uL0Hd M+ohng38ccgu9hJx6YzCN7Fe14JooKbPukG/WfClAgAzZSHRKpS4zGdGlg6D6EWayyWWoLR3 KoMA4LIIlaQbqaOhfe85b4mNgB1hqd0uRTHOah/6T+FUoSQ1IAeKLIDqj6rW7X4ISRn1CXGS LGDn2QKqR3KtU3cLf8hAeDeO7Qe1jTvLrG1Mfca8lEmC7/yN1gI7L4/cs6lhmXUgMaevuxss BxO2kkh0OS8HVFf+QQ7LZ5vt91yQVT9HVvOuVob0YtG+3rvkpMaHQilKloNoEkmMiHpwypBa IfAC6NP9smgionvvmQ5RWSEaH5/pfSUAYbqzWbqDxtqEF/mPOwARAQABzS1IYXJ0bXV0IEdv ZWJlbCA8aC5nb2ViZWxAY3JhenktY29tcGlsZXJzLmNvbT7CwZQEEwEKAD4CGwMCHgECF4AF CwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQAWIQTUrYucFnt1fE8I6Hd7dSgRv3c7ZQUCZXYHFwUJFwaNHQAK CRB7dSgRv3c7ZV3XD/0TQziqqbblVi+apROMF+nvuoyAhHX0KMAuVAI1Qi+9jJN1oa1xAl2P 5/Kco/WUxKSpuJBXN+riAiMslfBCCUkNO4ZlIXeVRzOZOWoDVJSuQYhu2NXsziD2mAXRTw0k SR5U8uHV98Vpqj8EHMgdQOfASOZpMAPMjcZ2BfBELD5Hp8xcjkMU+TMu1T/Sg22bcFQDSVsI CpGP8JqeAE82vpBjFUEBgriw49kRpccGHz3F37SpCqyLexJP6BvF42Tpa3+0FPciJ5HTPiUf DZfo4ob8ry/AVswjukVcvCVNAMlbH7pVQNrXWq7ObaM1+Fzzc7UpSooDsbZ5A5KjP2T36Kyj IW0wzXQEzk4n5+2m8m3+4TzQPgkGLRs5PfIjb5MAuzAZ25h+1YK8IepynHv/aVQl0FPoNXDn tGKL3g/K8FV3aSjYN+ya4IsCkuyyziUl7WshtHZ+jglYVcBF2xPDjICv+qmWzLLlVabhVvqG IYRL/hiaVgmpzQ+87jIOBsknT8BHExIcQMbf/hjwRau4kFKCpNTT9VMKOf+xcLjjB+wWoM/Y psUcJtikSnwb3fGmGZvMMyAS+wk240pCAZ9y9wXkAEY7qPL/DYjo9yjuU+c5xbn0okf8hSod NRuYgIn+bghxEvku/2Q8FjBvhLY/wefH8Qhz8R9WZ7z3SsXVhs54xc7BTQRSUDN6ARAAveU7 P66Ee50S+i8lV0TGX4xMculhxqMDRAvMNd7SOIBh0H4mm+bsIApqeLrX96jVKcfJE5EQuPGX 98vfK2ODfJG9UAzYj7GDuUgHipcvmtHkryIXinH+NhXYIEiLA4pDqBURWTaGmX+0+o/dB04p d0u7ew4zViCDc83l9z4jsHqW5yHHoG7s0BHudYqfoPU104jVRkvoOvox7/qE1UkEa8MXcWbb HQKgge6MWSx87Fm3ChkxefXc3XxkPJA4wDz14c1CUWuL2LnEbeVowBbYzRujN/4XBMFeiYha RPZOSPeiZbxkhx9qCzZKlGRCXjmkTrmcsorfp5E2g1sGi+opqUzKEqy0VOkiONNlEwjkRnzu PuBhf+CEKyzYtnPhfRZ+8fqVi3xi+O8j1K2XgQ2826RBlJmAilpoCBlx5fK4tqP4VjVxVcrc ChOH6Wit19evdNIHGVvXPtw0eqwj291HCx8L42D7JGs0ac3DTTx+AOr1+Fpm6zWSu09DNPIn MzD3Gcsq4eEcVuQcNpbUZv12cQIEXxpPSSN9+AQ0Rrkrpt/IAYZnnOKQG4r0Rl0hDQqAs/nm F2djs+KBdrNKy9jFUHrb4HSRFjGPIztQBfnn5B4PumQ+EGZGjN41hnNDG71zJ4Pzd7Vh/t12 cGSQtdXJPMoi60aHZHYGRyaRsEpO/bsAEQEAAcLBewQYAQoAJgIbDBYhBNSti5wWe3V8Twjo d3t1KBG/dztlBQJl0zYCBQkXBiA2AAoJEHt1KBG/dztl8SAP9jhSVpxB/3zV+uWhtH7dsihN Imylcs6/v/pn/topMASFAxwwODSTCBfqm/+H9KBL89gwRfBhwVKt2+e2nREMWyyzqWe1H8Ye tng4kEdmcAzT/eeL279Tu0GolFHQSkBZMeAp6qJu+JmFTsDAFhx+X+14mpU2CP352xDF9tDf Gw51b9jIhuKgkB1uukYSDghUTH3rW5+rxuwvNgQ7YDgznyykESfaCUeqVAabA8xKbErKM8G6 PLS93Zu1FJKCr2R2Br2HsI7Yi6g9VTM5Rws1COE0ApJr/GEnebpUh0QcOUiRxtx2LCR4nQI9 Vb6Dky+6aaWz4NsawdLJCym9MxKsGBwV70+xoqOVyA3NNWAZAnPYyEntPWMKTYlwJZDNURqT NSE3TlS3RUpHJ/y7FeSUQ0kVMmpFZjRY671qAvt6Q4uEsnDcz1g06zLnJKQLs9tEg4kCP32w kgMrrtAFQwbWzGTxf3xnjVooEJHHI7vOCzj83BQM4sq2Mp6kyuKjrAM+kLZChg8gd+Koj7fj eUIfwDjLCf3Ax7+g1QEqSqVsYxEB60oLONGMy0V31mofwefbWyFEhf7Mkb3lq01JtJ8TYNIL piWwGAMdoMZO8fXmTslMrRAStK3PpuUV1R3iAiqBHfyGYPQD5snxA4sHmWDSqI4OfUbVVkA6 OY6DWb43/DE= Organization: crazy-compilers.com In-Reply-To: <877c6gjx69.fsf@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Noris-IP: 91.57.76.141 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (-) Hi Simon, Am 27.01.25 um 12:47 schrieb Simon Tournier: > And the idea behind reads, either: Thanks for your explanation. For me this shows that the deliberation section needs more clarification. Anyway, "I still accept" :-) -- Regards Hartmut Goebel | Hartmut Goebel | h.goebel@HIDDEN | | www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jan 2025 17:39:02 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 27 12:39:01 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34336 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tcT4f-0007kL-Ex
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 12:39:01 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]:42079)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tcT4c-0007jx-RQ
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 12:39:00 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-43635796b48so30470025e9.0
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 09:38:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737999532; x=1738604332; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=/oxZkYtNsRqTAmCzA69uSe9YvP1E6vkmR9JstGfdrHY=;
b=hAfL0dL376qpPo7hr0SLhOAAB7RQRT6+Ot0F21gwFZ7TrzHjEt79R8Yie3pcA5pN4y
mYWUrLlvDdVDrp3tBTe6gBWF3AHjNCtk3GCEJlV7RQciL9mUYn2DjA+0v6BPa0TAHhy+
nDClDzEAX7Vvdog0dKyUdATgM5fDJFkL3g+dixjYqs4df7j3QtDptFie+WIXV1JZywEq
iHdDRwcQ276kL3L7rcZUsFatZu/e/3VBvLglgbnShfC8o0O3a8PhDFetoKNp9PzHHOXv
d1OSxIFR9Rcbvp55v1UceC/KoH6fyCc7pjTdJkLkScfR6C0ce0PBLw/E/oNHeTNoboZh
m5WA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737999532; x=1738604332;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject
:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=/oxZkYtNsRqTAmCzA69uSe9YvP1E6vkmR9JstGfdrHY=;
b=HkvAORNdHtfTQHgv71V9hs8hXxlgMrHRXQVwrqp8hUvDszLJTUyED2XcMus5pSed41
oyCh9JEPvNSMUNp77JXUenTcRg3w0E51GKWtQaVfT8s/tcGY7rvYRWS4+RjipCOTr576
wcagyHczzFvB2CU8N+am98TvODOfYklRjPK7X1zo8jjrA63OfXo7W9eyDMsGZbmQ2Ryz
ZM8jY/tw3dMv8sOHZcQKJqZAI8y7obD1K/E3mOFhbUTaQFi83wHiJgJn0pUbfOFY0SLR
I09G9/B/TekbAWKXmq1OaoUHf4oBABuo4pchOrQQYQiVBmVpNpKUCVwk1efzwpFcmU9E
0Yjw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCVZlDv+7xaYgXmKAbsai1xE5y2twVq/W+7W+cllqEnmLDyaHAhc6/tYQyawoKFNb4Qbs64ilA==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyKK+F9acMyknbPbt+g+O9RIG1OtI2uRNtElYQEtj5rCJU+dph8
cqXQc7cRlJ+uEmxqZ4gXWL+9+lIvvAZg3w0VfVzjWB00h4IBW3J8IeUxog==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctvgPlQu4Jh0Vo2LC3eR3KKqOpgGM5JMNVUBqeM0gvW9pFSmm+46ysPJ3E/GlS
A95mVdf4OQzVmBjKL1CnTX5zEAK9ADyV7kCf79XjYkKQewqGce3VIocXz6G/uBn0UNdk3hkc2Qr
DvcY/SsNaFSrPJVeJtfmmMusCbymJMsJe0XWRP2KgU9/Y3XDf96IvRAQXfKAOD+spLKB4Zzny5Y
kO0oLmCMuRUdZxZ5doC45ZZEUamcSQNGFtOnQ2qJ8tJA4PGjxrC1DUhUwV/QTGc3ZLpolW7ksmp
SfOfYCSEYKrAWBc1aj9dn2O0E6vEF/I5Y8YvxQGVkFJquI0BKR75J3DzQ5pgMD7HWQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF5OL15sJ8gseLtg7+tOUgx/BspmM4IjxuRfllMoBcpLTaAu48NnxsatNb7luv7Uly+kZcIJw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:a012:b0:434:9e17:190c with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-438d57c2f7emr1936325e9.0.1737999532210;
Mon, 27 Jan 2025 09:38:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-46.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr.
[194.254.61.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-438bd4a283csm141172125e9.0.2025.01.27.09.38.51
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Mon, 27 Jan 2025 09:38:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] I accept
In-Reply-To: <335834ca-314c-4d9c-b82e-381cf9e18653@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<335834ca-314c-4d9c-b82e-381cf9e18653@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 12:47:26 +0100
Message-ID: <877c6gjx69.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
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 Hartmut, On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 at 18:21,
Hartmut Goebel wrote: > I accept
Content analysis details: (1.1 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 Date: is 3 to 6 hours before Received: date
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:32f listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE No description available.
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
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 Hartmut,
On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 at 18:21, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>=
wrote:
> I accept
Quoting the GCD:
(1) =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal;
=20=20=20=20
(2) =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implem=
entation of
the proposal;
=20=20=20=20=20=20
(3) =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implem=
entation of
the proposal. A team member sending this reply should have
made constructive comments during the discussion period.
And the idea behind reads, either:
=E2=80=A2 I am in favour of this proposal without concern =3D> (1)
or
=E2=80=A2 I have some concerns:
=E2=80=A3 I can live with them =3D> (2)
or
=E2=80=A3 I cannot live with them =3D> (3)
=20
About (2) =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, it appears to me better if a summary =
of these
concerns can be provided for inclusion in the final document.
About (3) =E2=80=9CI disagree=E2=80=9D, it appears to me important to point=
which
comments had been done during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9C and a=
lso provides
a summary of these concerns for inclusion in the final document.
> For me the meaning of the replies are hard to understand and
> distinguish. Esp. the difference between "support" and "consent" as
When I am in accord or when I agree in opinion, it does not imply I
speak in favour of it. Somehow, if I say =E2=80=9CI consent that my neighb=
or is
noisy this week-end=E2=80=9D, then it does not mean =E2=80=9CI=E2=80=99m fa=
vour of this noise=E2=80=9D.
> well as why "I accept" and "I disagree" refer to "the implementation
> of the proposal", but "I support" does not.
Well, indeed. I don=E2=80=99t know if the distinction matters here. Someh=
ow,
the idea is: the concerns need to be concrete, hence about the
implementation. While, if one supports, then it=E2=80=99s about the whole
proposal, else one would have concerns, i.e., only accept.
Again, I don=E2=80=99t know if the distinction matters.
> [This said, for me it's not clear whether my deliberation ought to be
> "support" or "consent".]
I hope the explanations above makes the frame clearer.
> Please note that I'm not a member of any team, thus my deliberation
> not really counts. Anyhow I wanted to state it since I took part in
> the discussion.
IMHO, yes your opinion counts! Because we are bootstrapping the process
and it appears to me sane that team members and committers express their
views. :-)
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jan 2025 14:20:09 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 27 09:20:09 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60095 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tcPyC-0008S7-MA for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 09:20:08 -0500 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:59607) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <glv@HIDDEN>) id 1tcPyA-0008N4-JX for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 09:20:07 -0500 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 037D1240101 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 15:19:57 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1737987598; bh=7CG/y+TkoKC6Pt1VfUF+IrFXZKNKVO1Tnyr/zcAuRX0=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:From; b=eyTtB37HDlLXZ+RRCWqgaSVTiNN8Cfb5n3hx4QOjimJsPpuOevi6oLqNAXFHlQEdV 9INX/ryKdEbwhvXR/916xNVKHv7nvW32/w1mntH6joKLNFX2DcVgultlkX3S7zLRO8 RVOVAHN6zzcK77oCeuBLQm0lt8XwiNujl/3ouz9j48cs3YjYl5l1EltASlm4l+z+4s sACaNTiOd6QC/2J8MpVppBND9RkzF9DkgIgugBt/p0+1BEzjIcP6D7lCPlZX6f56TG I6M4S8QryX7fNhuhys5veYYOe/F2BdmzHxE6aCal8pnDrmWUXhw/zsUecEuIGPH+pg ysLIwfbeG8fMQ== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4YhVtP2dZ8z9rxW for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 15:19:56 +0100 (CET) From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:44:08 +0100") References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 14:19:56 +0000 Message-ID: <878qqwl4oj.fsf@kitej> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 I support. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIUEAREKAC0WIQTLxZxm7Ce5cXlAaz5r6CCK3yH+PwUCZ5eWDA8cZ2x2QHBvc3Rl by5uZXQACgkQa+ggit8h/j9FGgEAj0fi/qxX1kVMzhXLcWnKuoS3FwW54l4d0aup EGx0iz8A/356QbytJvIWMSar7cCKC4N2nISf5GKNva3q1eo7E8w/ =zxwv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jan 2025 10:43:05 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 27 05:43:05 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59519 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tcMa8-0005gU-Nd for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 05:43:04 -0500 Received: from mail-oo1-xc34.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::c34]:48369) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <laurent.gatto@HIDDEN>) id 1tcMa6-0005fm-Vs for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 05:43:03 -0500 Received: by mail-oo1-xc34.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5f2e31139d9so1983819eaf.0 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 02:43:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737974577; x=1738579377; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=nY1WIYvOnwrZA03D3AaSp1XzHPilLHVuLWp3yUpaLFY=; b=Jt5pl+SfgMgHgNzm4klMEmzf2zCMFW5Q4Br5YkrkrUZ4nrEZha2sgvvOmkttEOoXmD Mg0U5YFRn9s38YYEwsuiDdAWlVmHkhKyWjDPuOKGIOjwI0Xo1JioHzen3rvnvblWupgV BkTpoA0nSPR5XlAn9AjyTUEFi7qxZ/fdiNKPnj3fenktxcKkgqCFInsftzidVtgUbV5Y RD4AE5dw2ffaMbftFzMCg2kKZINQkpAQVAR3k78MuH6gWwEohMFCcI0+QeZpa2yIc0g3 36z2h0X4QOBS757uYVhvzN5sZYNKpCLnwMD1ifj3oNo8Rrx9gcnccpxrO8Q3n+vyk6we mo3Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737974577; x=1738579377; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=nY1WIYvOnwrZA03D3AaSp1XzHPilLHVuLWp3yUpaLFY=; b=GD2TseVXjg7zc3PhZZPYWRAV626odPxD/H+Hn2A/LFe+PEg7LEmvoW6rwkOgSJ71Eq mbFlsoyZEIGrqZThqZzKE6DMDh69tm26pLiMQVkiRWrmYY7iqPw268W4BUnwAEVdw+g5 FgccZeWVGD8cTf+OxSP6DUHKucLCQUGoPfsz1oR9XK7BKnHc6561sTxWWHDN8GO2TVKa orCd6BtsuLSnsEP5LI6BbnYDakDWj6FXO7Op6Am+mbMal2VooiTQez4NmWQx4WHOctzD np42LEOAI6ZcZTPon5602WiaoOsT2Rjq47gVgB1yA9bmWBu0miRyKmnqDoyXePAT4zLg q2sg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw4s7vTc1nIloLTqASOhBlM29Td6yo8FdOq3GhiriWUMUzJt5CT ZcC9dAss7FLpSzT6VeRGRlk7aoqlw2P9TH8p5vYdualFca0ZOqDKE7BbhmL6giMJuJkKsbMt+MW sOleTXg0BETuQSQj0s1yil5Y/9/5zMSyj X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctuhOk0b4C9tB1jtdD07rSBX0RFJKawBaMjRDHE4eAU5crfFoMxRoe1JWaEDDl 7xuGRNAohdfPOYOcrWzC8SycCC6MA6nGcPioWGQUt3q4m9bRCkLAp4E+eQG929hs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEq18dkJ3J+R46DJ/Wm3nSypyHA7CHhRecu5Czo84pdAeGTIZG7Rdg1vq+Mw8GrNK7Bcpqxvx0//9MmXBVzhO0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6820:4b02:b0:5f2:d799:ab91 with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5fa38774524mr21185207eaf.2.1737974576749; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 02:42:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Laurent Gatto <laurent.gatto@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 11:42:31 +0100 X-Gm-Features: AWEUYZlXn9sbuHaBwq2LUhsW_nRb7jCjP8KmhIssSgQa2vFtjj-jCmbTUZ6xCNA Message-ID: <CA+uNOziyodVCbTMKxfAHdH4+EONeYrLBXDgFwhuW64K7KAn0=Q@HIDDEN> Subject: Guix Consensus Document process To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (-) I support
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Jan 2025 17:21:44 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jan 26 12:21:44 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57751 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tc6KO-0001bi-Bn for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2025 12:21:44 -0500 Received: from mail02.noris.net ([62.128.1.232]:33693) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>) id 1tc6KL-0001bY-85 for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2025 12:21:42 -0500 Received: from p57b08fd2.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([87.176.143.210] helo=hermia.goebel-consult.de) by mail02.noris.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>) id 1tc6KJ-0000xJ-K0 for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2025 18:21:39 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hermia.goebel-consult.de [192.168.110.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by hermia.goebel-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0236D602A1 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 26 Jan 2025 18:21:36 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <335834ca-314c-4d9c-b82e-381cf9e18653@HIDDEN> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2025 18:21:36 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org From: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN> Content-Language: de-DE, en-US Subject: I accept Autocrypt: addr=h.goebel@HIDDEN; keydata= xsFNBFJQM3oBEACiUXmMppc3+A7JpF3lPz8O/mRhfz1U6F4EOTlacTrCcm7Xg5U2JsPPNapV r5+vHnKBK+xbaX3s/A/G+SwrUZhi1X1HRnSNY1CqL8CT7rZmOtfjg4ExnOuCjie2bKhb9JKm lJ7MrNimIbNQoX1mRcQ4VMEflhyWfaPGbT73siuMkbr020ExhzW8T18JIC01SgWMULYMBXOB oGY21am/vaTFCK8bym1P4HVN8i64uOWL0agkAMHbju6SZtG2fYJ68eS3P/97bXRg1pveEdpa FgaFZhquecw4WdedwLwt1xNcjAg/p6tN73W3asEZTgMHa+iNzbJgcyhWpci09wQZfZ1uL0Hd M+ohng38ccgu9hJx6YzCN7Fe14JooKbPukG/WfClAgAzZSHRKpS4zGdGlg6D6EWayyWWoLR3 KoMA4LIIlaQbqaOhfe85b4mNgB1hqd0uRTHOah/6T+FUoSQ1IAeKLIDqj6rW7X4ISRn1CXGS LGDn2QKqR3KtU3cLf8hAeDeO7Qe1jTvLrG1Mfca8lEmC7/yN1gI7L4/cs6lhmXUgMaevuxss BxO2kkh0OS8HVFf+QQ7LZ5vt91yQVT9HVvOuVob0YtG+3rvkpMaHQilKloNoEkmMiHpwypBa IfAC6NP9smgionvvmQ5RWSEaH5/pfSUAYbqzWbqDxtqEF/mPOwARAQABzS1IYXJ0bXV0IEdv ZWJlbCA8aC5nb2ViZWxAY3JhenktY29tcGlsZXJzLmNvbT7CwZQEEwEKAD4CGwMCHgECF4AF CwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQAWIQTUrYucFnt1fE8I6Hd7dSgRv3c7ZQUCZXYHFwUJFwaNHQAK CRB7dSgRv3c7ZV3XD/0TQziqqbblVi+apROMF+nvuoyAhHX0KMAuVAI1Qi+9jJN1oa1xAl2P 5/Kco/WUxKSpuJBXN+riAiMslfBCCUkNO4ZlIXeVRzOZOWoDVJSuQYhu2NXsziD2mAXRTw0k SR5U8uHV98Vpqj8EHMgdQOfASOZpMAPMjcZ2BfBELD5Hp8xcjkMU+TMu1T/Sg22bcFQDSVsI CpGP8JqeAE82vpBjFUEBgriw49kRpccGHz3F37SpCqyLexJP6BvF42Tpa3+0FPciJ5HTPiUf DZfo4ob8ry/AVswjukVcvCVNAMlbH7pVQNrXWq7ObaM1+Fzzc7UpSooDsbZ5A5KjP2T36Kyj IW0wzXQEzk4n5+2m8m3+4TzQPgkGLRs5PfIjb5MAuzAZ25h+1YK8IepynHv/aVQl0FPoNXDn tGKL3g/K8FV3aSjYN+ya4IsCkuyyziUl7WshtHZ+jglYVcBF2xPDjICv+qmWzLLlVabhVvqG IYRL/hiaVgmpzQ+87jIOBsknT8BHExIcQMbf/hjwRau4kFKCpNTT9VMKOf+xcLjjB+wWoM/Y psUcJtikSnwb3fGmGZvMMyAS+wk240pCAZ9y9wXkAEY7qPL/DYjo9yjuU+c5xbn0okf8hSod NRuYgIn+bghxEvku/2Q8FjBvhLY/wefH8Qhz8R9WZ7z3SsXVhs54xc7BTQRSUDN6ARAAveU7 P66Ee50S+i8lV0TGX4xMculhxqMDRAvMNd7SOIBh0H4mm+bsIApqeLrX96jVKcfJE5EQuPGX 98vfK2ODfJG9UAzYj7GDuUgHipcvmtHkryIXinH+NhXYIEiLA4pDqBURWTaGmX+0+o/dB04p d0u7ew4zViCDc83l9z4jsHqW5yHHoG7s0BHudYqfoPU104jVRkvoOvox7/qE1UkEa8MXcWbb HQKgge6MWSx87Fm3ChkxefXc3XxkPJA4wDz14c1CUWuL2LnEbeVowBbYzRujN/4XBMFeiYha RPZOSPeiZbxkhx9qCzZKlGRCXjmkTrmcsorfp5E2g1sGi+opqUzKEqy0VOkiONNlEwjkRnzu PuBhf+CEKyzYtnPhfRZ+8fqVi3xi+O8j1K2XgQ2826RBlJmAilpoCBlx5fK4tqP4VjVxVcrc ChOH6Wit19evdNIHGVvXPtw0eqwj291HCx8L42D7JGs0ac3DTTx+AOr1+Fpm6zWSu09DNPIn MzD3Gcsq4eEcVuQcNpbUZv12cQIEXxpPSSN9+AQ0Rrkrpt/IAYZnnOKQG4r0Rl0hDQqAs/nm F2djs+KBdrNKy9jFUHrb4HSRFjGPIztQBfnn5B4PumQ+EGZGjN41hnNDG71zJ4Pzd7Vh/t12 cGSQtdXJPMoi60aHZHYGRyaRsEpO/bsAEQEAAcLBewQYAQoAJgIbDBYhBNSti5wWe3V8Twjo d3t1KBG/dztlBQJl0zYCBQkXBiA2AAoJEHt1KBG/dztl8SAP9jhSVpxB/3zV+uWhtH7dsihN Imylcs6/v/pn/topMASFAxwwODSTCBfqm/+H9KBL89gwRfBhwVKt2+e2nREMWyyzqWe1H8Ye tng4kEdmcAzT/eeL279Tu0GolFHQSkBZMeAp6qJu+JmFTsDAFhx+X+14mpU2CP352xDF9tDf Gw51b9jIhuKgkB1uukYSDghUTH3rW5+rxuwvNgQ7YDgznyykESfaCUeqVAabA8xKbErKM8G6 PLS93Zu1FJKCr2R2Br2HsI7Yi6g9VTM5Rws1COE0ApJr/GEnebpUh0QcOUiRxtx2LCR4nQI9 Vb6Dky+6aaWz4NsawdLJCym9MxKsGBwV70+xoqOVyA3NNWAZAnPYyEntPWMKTYlwJZDNURqT NSE3TlS3RUpHJ/y7FeSUQ0kVMmpFZjRY671qAvt6Q4uEsnDcz1g06zLnJKQLs9tEg4kCP32w kgMrrtAFQwbWzGTxf3xnjVooEJHHI7vOCzj83BQM4sq2Mp6kyuKjrAM+kLZChg8gd+Koj7fj eUIfwDjLCf3Ax7+g1QEqSqVsYxEB60oLONGMy0V31mofwefbWyFEhf7Mkb3lq01JtJ8TYNIL piWwGAMdoMZO8fXmTslMrRAStK3PpuUV1R3iAiqBHfyGYPQD5snxA4sHmWDSqI4OfUbVVkA6 OY6DWb43/DE= Organization: crazy-compilers.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Noris-IP: 87.176.143.210 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 accept For me the meaning of the replies are hard to understand and distinguish. Esp. the difference between "support" and "consent" as well as why "I accept" and "I disagree" refer to "the implementation of the proposal", but "I support" does not. [This said, for me it's not clear whether my deliberation ought to be "support" or "consent".] Please note that I'm not a member of any team, thus my deliberation not really counts. Anyhow I wanted to state it since I took part in the discussion. -- Regards Hartmut Goebel | Hartmut Goebel | h.goebel@HIDDEN | | www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Jan 2025 16:18:36 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 25 11:18:36 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52184 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tbirj-0000No-Nu for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2025 11:18:35 -0500 Received: from latitanza.investici.org ([82.94.249.234]:40793) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <divya@HIDDEN>) id 1tbirg-0000NZ-Fw for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2025 11:18:33 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=subvertising.org; s=stigmate; t=1737821911; bh=hshjUpwVdqS9QmGPhPdzkEMGHaYWuGSvaGnpFVl5Kow=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:From; b=fbeMtIQS59pOl5YIFdx5F2Yp69EL0UP4owbE2PSsNH/BfX1hXJnnOy9seq76xd5xw Ja6jrdYW7hL1MbTqBBnejQEb6+VAlqD4QUaTXuQ4pGWWe5qlUOBSPRbP8FtetSoCl1 5omZ0YMk8pmnnLj0I1Ilvdaq/SPeHHkNyywjpjc8= Received: from mx3.investici.org (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by latitanza.investici.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4YgKc70nCHzGp50 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 25 Jan 2025 16:18:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.94.249.234] (mx3.investici.org [82.94.249.234]) (Authenticated sender: divya@HIDDEN) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YgKc60qqNzGp4J for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 25 Jan 2025 16:18:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 16:18:25 +0000 From: Divya Ranjan <divya@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: User-Agent: Thunderbird for Android Message-ID: <471327BF-28CC-4FE3-B4E2-F42DFBA1C79C@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=----2N68O18P4322QTFNF1T7Q3ERTIBG9U Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+) 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: I support. Divya Ranjan, Mathematics, Philosophy and Libre Software I support. Divya Ranjan, Mathematics, Philosophy and Libre Software Content analysis details: (1.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. [82.94.249.234 listed in sa-accredit.habeas.com] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record 0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. [82.94.249.234 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [82.94.249.234 listed in list.dnswl.org] 2.0 BLANK_SUBJECT Subject is present but empty -0.0 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE No description available. X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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: 0.3 (/) ------2N68O18P4322QTFNF1T7Q3ERTIBG9U Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support=2E Divya Ranjan, Mathematics, Philosophy and Libre Software ------2N68O18P4322QTFNF1T7Q3ERTIBG9U Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE html><html><body><div dir=3D"auto">I support=2E</div><div dir=3D"= auto">Divya Ranjan, Mathematics, Philosophy and Libre Software</div></body>= </html> ------2N68O18P4322QTFNF1T7Q3ERTIBG9U--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Jan 2025 10:24:06 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 25 05:24:06 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48652 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tbdKg-0003wb-2O for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2025 05:24:06 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:49340) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <andreas@HIDDEN>) id 1tbdKd-0003vz-Rc for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jan 2025 05:24:04 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 691CA3CB; Sat, 25 Jan 2025 11:23:56 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: hera.aquilenet.fr; none X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavis at hera.aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id WSMugmL3HrzZ; Sat, 25 Jan 2025 11:23:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from jurong (176-179-191-150.abo.bbox.fr [176.179.191.150]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F4DC383; Sat, 25 Jan 2025 11:23:55 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 11:23:53 +0100 From: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Support Message-ID: <Z5S7uYfbGr8GbEif@jurong> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Rspamd-Server: hera X-Spamd-Bar: ++++++ X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 691CA3CB X-Spamd-Result: default: False [6.33 / 15.00]; SPAM_FLAG(5.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM(3.00)[1.000]; BAYES_HAM(-2.07)[95.46%]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[] X-Spam-Level: ****** X-Rspamd-Action: add header X-Spam: Yes X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (-) My previous message was rejected as spam... I also support. Andreas
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Jan 2025 15:18:15 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 24 10:18:15 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46551 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tbLRm-0005c2-Ro for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:18:15 -0500 Received: from cotopaxi.ee.ethz.ch ([129.132.148.196]:45137) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <gabriel@HIDDEN>) id 1tbLRk-0005bn-Ho for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:18:13 -0500 Received: from localhost (antispam.ee.ethz.ch [129.132.2.16]) by cotopaxi.ee.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948B5200A3 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 16:18:05 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd at antispam.ee.ethz.ch Received: from cotopaxi.ee.ethz.ch ([129.132.148.196]) by localhost (antispam.ee.ethz.ch [129.132.2.16]) (amavisd-new, port 10028) with ESMTP id E7K5ZXhVr6kQ for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 16:18:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from blackbox (212-51-128-25.fiber7.init7.net [212.51.128.25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: gabriel) by cotopaxi.ee.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 16:18:04 +0100 (CET) From: Gabriel Wicki <gabriel@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Guix Consensus Document process Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 16:18:00 +0100 Message-ID: <871pws44wn.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (-) I support
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Jan 2025 10:42:32 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 24 05:42:32 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43776 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tbH8y-00062Z-0S for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 05:42:32 -0500 Received: from mail.envs.net ([5.199.136.28]:34558) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <iyzsong@HIDDEN>) id 1tbH8u-00062L-2a for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 05:42:29 -0500 Received: from localhost (mail.envs.net [127.0.0.1]) by mail.envs.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B260E38A0CA9; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:42:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=envs.net; s=modoboa; t=1737715345; bh=JRjcA+VTo1EgaZJo+ay62SRy16pJZl6s6WO4b1D3p6Q=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=mlgkcXf6aQZ65c1BYX0VEGeampA2Bp+nIV3lQRPXGNi8KI2gQy1aZDtQjiT0wadiB mzISga6g0EyFw5vA6wqcbEUAoZiKFoTZcOmcxZ6ELAqsX4S13Ya7cD7nW/MRrbU+M5 TaYydXCqZgCwzEKbonQ+505kEw4fRNpy8DacS59VKgEtQEGdCy+J9zhyQXII/fJ63A nNChk3Q/8z5Cwb2hMIowFNx5r9AdDJiRK/Fh1W/39tVK4vl1Psdoz6Kt5k70sYJasG H6pRzbpkuToXEDRS72z1OQlE3Klqvf+qPLQBBfJiRt0CFIF4kBqkZyVhGpxQIWPCz0 10iUx8cZSJZF8xB+bubdsBCuK6sUga2EWcONPyuRJmFCn7m1mdopN/UriXtMD7L9VY ymOyRR6be+Qk2m+DaJmnW94d+mij7Xh9i3RRUJt7TgXM45i888wXDyzifBEYi4M4Et b1iHxffMcBQ21eGTQn58TP1xXO0dm/iQEWccn11IzVKUM6YPqU6v3HNddS8yFXjI99 7DlJCSNNIzfpxsXNb5D9qwNtv3dv/iPY3QzDY41DTuY40vGW5u02BWYwpZlVNMSUWp L9PgONsT6BDIfR1zNJiQI431Znlem5TMdpxs54gJmhPe35F/jAwxtIdOR8DxAvQuyO u0YnIw7rbU6hgifgEX0UM9Ws= 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 PnZojubPkl4P; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:42:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [112.44.100.254]) (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, 24 Jan 2025 10:42:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [local]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id dd6cdf43; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:45:53 +0000 (UTC) From: =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [bug#74736] Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation In-Reply-To: <87v7u5iy61.fsf@HIDDEN> (Maxim Cournoyer's message of "Thu, 23 Jan 2025 20:09:58 +0900") References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87v7u5iy61.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 18:45:53 +0800 Message-ID: <87msfg5w2m.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-) I support. My teams: xfce, lxqt, games, localization, qt. Thanks.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Jan 2025 08:30:43 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 24 03:30:43 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43543 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tbF5P-0002XK-2v for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 03:30:43 -0500 Received: from sender4-of-o56.zoho.com ([136.143.188.56]:21622) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <rekado@HIDDEN>) id 1tbF5L-0002X6-2w for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 03:30:41 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1737707435; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=Yzei7wbznJlQCR6B2hwcEhEMPhAwR6blJP0e+/SJ0Qx+zIpud+FbNud0l+r0+bAW2lYsRyVwh5Gl+e/ePhd/zvTn5nQwDX8mzzfucLmcJJH5hoinGciTKp9PN1qnel2R4BmX1k53JhEJyobVeX4ebgVC/P4jJl9KctjR1o1U3rk= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1737707435; h=Content-Type:Date:Date:From:From:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:Subject:To:To:Message-Id:Reply-To:Cc; bh=p9OZsxLer01vNGvFvnpezPwUQtyPHUM7Haav6AgZZn0=; b=TmFAXVlwdmiXpbjSeyhSDFgtbSShaj/x6rON0PnuMGCfz7dNlj4Fm4LvMF9dR1oJE4bcu4ItNQtCOR0hnJFfJ1sp3C+/vVQ9ycQzpW/Fwhf/D+JByrbQa96stb3UGvcAxBzE1X3RVGIsMmYdS10x5lt4JTGdTf7rISjJNoylv0g= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@HIDDEN; dmarc=pass header.from=<rekado@HIDDEN> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1737707435; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@HIDDEN; h=From:From:To:To:Subject:Subject:Date:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-Id:Reply-To:Cc; bh=p9OZsxLer01vNGvFvnpezPwUQtyPHUM7Haav6AgZZn0=; b=bH4ihwtIpJNcQSsVOef7I7a1/d6nF5AeWwOKZp2097JXpejXLItbHNtZ5Q2Y/FIx DDcJK9YXmDTUtvsaz/3SoLkszxbsgYF9jtTTUFnYoclnT14/hrqGT5eESftV/5eNGrh m7cDN6XM/RWUQ28gTtTrI179CWJC35FsZ7BEpDAQ= Received: by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1737707432167254.93742712352116; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 00:30:32 -0800 (PST) From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation User-Agent: mu4e 1.12.7; emacs 29.4 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 09:30:28 +0100 Message-ID: <87ed0sr4uz.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (-) I support. -- Ricardo (member of these teams: R, Sugar, and Python)
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Jan 2025 07:12:37 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 24 02:12:37 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43397 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tbDrp-0007Hz-DS for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 02:12:37 -0500 Received: from msg-1.mailo.com ([213.182.54.11]:45814 helo=mailo.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <mail@HIDDEN>) id 1tbDrl-0007Ha-Sx for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 02:12:35 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nicolasgoaziou.fr; s=mailo; t=1737702746; bh=Buld05XheLK27LR3IqBWANdT8nygDuDfg/u6KqqvKMg=; h=X-EA-Auth:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=IV6yvLdyWi9D7KBa4JmeB/t2ziB8y7kldfquEOLkH7dx0zwMeveQdiqbY5s49RA/V CecalMCFqfqYNz/ks/xHj+OLYUY/EY71JmYzCPJmL/vsXkNe8uNy0I7shAiL/ZbmXK EhKJkLHUezsweI7eCE6YoppVPcs1jo4ObOOBfC8A= Received: by b221-5.in.mailobj.net [192.168.90.25] with ESMTP via ip-20.mailobj.net [213.182.54.20] Fri, 24 Jan 2025 08:12:26 +0100 (CET) X-EA-Auth: O800qUksc41JADrKhQQR1XAvhK1fjMQfrVBDfP3ZoohnMlrbyXIkAmyWIsvr8B9PgJBidxv41fJGzwxDYB0rzV8bPQPQRHM3LCuQNU+8/Dw= From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 08:12:09 +0100 Message-ID: <87tt9obs8m.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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, I support the proposed process. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 11:10:20 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 06:10:20 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39506 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tav6K-00084B-11 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 06:10:20 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x1033.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1033]:48391) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>) id 1tav6H-00083q-Lj for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 06:10:18 -0500 Received: by mail-pj1-x1033.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2efb17478adso1443597a91.1 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 03:10:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737630610; x=1738235410; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=0YsFki7ClTMdmR04OxyJvbqaYZe3li48FbwEKTeKXv8=; b=aNnT6sxLAxSZ1/YYJjZuadbOl87zxG2A9agt7wW+FAN79vbC3koqdKS1N81zoM9l0k unuaeLuSAb880NnBgFK6lUWrcdypwHH/0zE7zvMzYOS43sWV1X2NoPUNvgtekJ57y780 G8r80LIiLlAtv1+wCE+U6Y1UYw8R5t0Lg7bU+6xCHqBnKylKz491C4pdZE3Dm8nULvZE iFXnql4IM16mg+7Zuv0+5RQbndebYw0+Pz+xfhg/GLh2sJ9FRdy5Mb+DUdRsz+ZVzVrd /OJz9sVQZlBTBOrrCFGPfrIj6lFLJWFeSFmMvQAyHUixd/tBB30nltjxwXy7NsqLLcLO KOhA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737630610; x=1738235410; h=mime-version:user-agent: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=0YsFki7ClTMdmR04OxyJvbqaYZe3li48FbwEKTeKXv8=; b=QGo1XEN45CF0du8u/AndgvvIzy83vwBLavzXcJdw6kzQw/tznWyKARPi+MjGcGOH4M nt7cgur3Dg5vZdrslFT/ELu9Iv9JhD3YccKrssfTML/A8WhV9MqbhmReDKY/dtUoZ4lg W2lgp4rUIaxvVByXBiMjjN4SoWZj1Qyv6Hw48znvoWFBp7glDvdw4hEiWTeJBf/RcRiE Q8ldT9gedLAwwCGus37qT7DXVBzQFAabHUC66jkEgncdKGlKaciPa4Hqqmp3wCKQR7Le NEg/b+cExnkcVbLF5atXwJSE1inpDPEgozICiQp8csrOgdUVkPOaN/UbCL1isycmy43J fp5Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxOKPDGZ9wvn5n/y5rVr2IR4ckdarbZAkv8VeJRUU/tgPgpO4A6 xWWzlEeKtT17vd6bVGVgVJl2INc0ex/V6B0zHmGd7tlVhCYJrT/OdorSzA== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncs4/id9VOqfwvHUvftfZoAvPxAaB7/5O79Si3mQAn29fe2fDrrBjBph4sYuMgx bkJg7pL7IWS1F2tv8PZ37uxuik+/S3cZsSSYFRIaYsd2nRRt0kscEDrAGia6eH/GN+KN7CvDZtU bXhZUr04SwZdI28NYfJyRMn9sqg7RP65d/z7ga/4AU1Ch/V1eHpctYcdgejnf0Ogk9b/SEN3w0Z ZAnmQrAqOF1GDzZ2FGUHgTU/YU8oqbOEifvz7zYGfxft3lm9S1GuqDxw9PXjVRll5pqdpJk6soP iQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFYmXCcSjSVRimfK9rtd/nT3krQzI3GeNUiUlvo13BDDHz6Oytx+b3emcYovVjsDtT0k9nZag== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3503:b0:2ee:d96a:5831 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2f782d7dc10mr37904689a91.30.1737630610432; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 03:10:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from terra ([2405:6586:be0:0:c8ff:1707:9b9:af89]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 98e67ed59e1d1-2f7e6a79a9bsm3688484a91.17.2025.01.23.03.10.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 23 Jan 2025 03:10:09 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:44:08 +0100") References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 20:09:58 +0900 Message-ID: <87v7u5iy61.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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, I support. -- Thanks, Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 09:55:19 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 04:55:19 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39344 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tatvj-0004DZ-I5 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 04:55:19 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x42e.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42e]:60519) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <sharlatanus@HIDDEN>) id 1tatvg-0004CK-3a for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 04:55:17 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-385deda28b3so435895f8f.0 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 01:55:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737626109; x=1738230909; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:message-id:date:subject:to:from:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Fpy0lW2/GvOnI7GE5kAFJinipaV/pQksQMcC23hmb1I=; b=esB8wQPXi/WeHz7yRCXdAhToO8xBOYDgAxPz4xd1TEUfFwQuDEY40VjVfBkv7MYuZT HD5CsGVTtSMqcWqH7yEmL0+gbfurFSAv5bSSdGM+w8rDYmmHUK7eBlXUzBX3RYNYr95S veHrG/W62XiRtsHPsmrwgoVLGSI5hfHXVIyeBRT6Zrk+OhWBefBcGjXXwU10UJmLgM/j lXwihf7U5M0OP8GNy2g8JwhhzQJKQlfw7CWt7ztdqJEkBa6mUFPcjdVdUCOxI5j4LFre xeuWwhgSgXTBHxrFNsEuthwZ6Sw05j5Yro7Gmp3uJ51EMJfD00IqUvIEJpWZiei/AvIE GZzA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737626109; x=1738230909; h=mime-version:message-id:date:subject:to:from:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Fpy0lW2/GvOnI7GE5kAFJinipaV/pQksQMcC23hmb1I=; b=rQowyIXmIBBUVQBASZNy90V+mehXA4BNV0n9gKOZm981Y74/PNvuUkQU1FpRXQbYwD lc++j/Jcw6Ut+xpXbLOvFe2qpxnu0EUQ0ky+xBlfGQ7dfPoarc/Ac4zPIcCqKBDPSZ7X z/jPvEKH+XZJ0hJngIyBwjo9fOz4XNa4lGp9o3FdanIl19lBiF/jkfrtmh9kRB45Qeio +XGnh+4qe6G61Lso6PggeWsMpPk+zCo9FG8dBiBdl9t1TmLMNaIEcTdmZDFcBtVr0AcF jA7F7nYnZpMJ1C9N7ypfwDUJ1wFA6RUDmU164BXCCnYo/zQC9wGH/1FLb8w/UvOzGRZP 2bVw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzmwCdHn3syyyxT8P3g4dsqVoLlOH+n0DpBXI78jfsvZ0sYUUK2 IGnUkXNhSvijUqjOvrTK5ksJ5i5xFSy5B9m0Nxglr5zUH7C3DlT3rb6bAwBY X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvR80X3EEywPOJAc5nQBTTK0/YVR0KcQfbEKaEMWjFHtxSDPW4hSIwGz3sXcBS btC+x2woy2xfLbNx7hJAPOb7uVS6Uzi3WBjvwQoOpkD4hFUyXY9uVp1OwSO1zsnVpaX4GwK6XaP AOW0Nakrz4gqkFJwvB4IxY4ehdPeYSj9vTlnh2+OGFxgmx4TRYBtV6i1d++oumq3uccfVWZ+R3V yFpngJjEBKcAzq0m4YHBY/T8YirRdgpvpeFTNMdAp7+wGR5/nBC53sPpyCkYrwCwhGtpD4KdKhE qDcwYNsqCFMK1ym0JRA6n7U+qj6bzQ6dI7ec6r9alLpn1fo9KDhMIf6g X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFIs0P9KLbPYmeEzRwSwLH135uI7U/Ukjb/oC6A9KdSptA5C6nlPeccvhmsXhclqjs6dh9Evg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5f8c:0:b0:386:3329:6a04 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38bf57a957cmr29340466f8f.39.1737626109269; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 01:55:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from guxtil (cpc100684-bagu15-2-0-cust967.1-3.cable.virginm.net. [86.8.111.200]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38bf327decbsm19086288f8f.90.2025.01.23.01.55.08 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 23 Jan 2025 01:55:08 -0800 (PST) From: Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:55:07 +0000 Message-ID: <877c6lj1ms.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: 74736 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 I support it. Member of (starting from the most active) go, python, lisp, science, and sysadmin teams. --- Thanks, Oleg --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmEeB3micIcJkGAhndtcnv/Ys0rUFAmeSEfsACgkQdtcnv/Ys 0rWfBg//cZ0k9n+d5QgEs7vu2kgn7TTvo+NAMcLC6s0KeY9Th+E072UX/eRLeIPO HfL/JYBZrPVbIVxrut7jXrdjrTk2bjFdDAFluHXadPP6B42swSBsREf+Gg/Hr1Mx GPTeKR+yOKYh/w1vvbk4tSfCiKoXlwvd/ICq5yo9eY4kf2YlAu0m+zP+T7UF7/L4 6Vv/iPB8WZD2KpQ2pultg/NqldFDzOCoqi2+LAJQ48a3N/kCIb4gd5CkozkO+/5C Vv+txu5j7qTIvOVtI0enxkwGj6G6eCW6Ik1quh92LmxXgjS5cvif5VM4hk1h44ij L2ed+jo8RhNXdUxxEThimNrRwBDrbijHxLvlXl0Jrl9q1Vpcl7dXeDV0Yxbiri8c ax4DfJy4ggtBPLAQBsK0EvM5RIbx9MHjSzd90gB8q8hOeSIyQ8iB+m9rEQCfFoD/ rsp+kNJ+hfvZYDrSA0kGlh7n28UAA7NN5cOLVbukujEy1le+xywFpzmxqAusUhho 8B163gx6BOlcVvpuEFi+ux+gI3cI02iCHFY6gglOiLocnxw1ElFEF+2vI3trTVmP nn2G8r4jc7wTycZJVsIsQrQQT7mLxIoq9U7qslESsFbdg6rrkxVlDNHbSb5DjxU/ OGZXRQVjZWLFQJ6qDGMO3YsNl0QWToeMSYsMJVmUc7kXDekkkYA= =Q/z6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 09:19:33 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 04:19:33 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39262 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tatN7-0002Ph-00 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 04:19:33 -0500 Received: from tobias.gr ([80.241.217.52]:41838) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <me@HIDDEN>) id 1tatN3-0002PR-1D for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 04:19:30 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2018; bh=wrBbPuiCv7cmu R+MTMC5mwhEdWwxSHHbJEOaUDQGZJs=; h=subject:to:from:date; d=tobias.gr; b=XDArLkfGFhb+5Mqk5PmozKxIcpZElkLf9wLe8M4eObG49VsWTmkluwPbA665RkTpP03Z yLq77oyUme/UadP0/7OHoFRwWwXytzCCNi3BWMq3SoJdfaLYytjpML/QHmtcDx9AjY5L9Q LN6uegmGeBmZz4cniCYzqLKYNOz3a6yjjMd5noNjBsCxLnNKhfMsAvdn53ZZQWe39tQxWK 9J8ZOEq+sKJwFFRbFPcXOF63T4aOe/3pK0cgYvumDklRcjCeT15Gtbm5z4wWoSvE+hr6/2 Em6RfEtqyTdHhubp3q3+5v56sg2HgP06QQAJMKfHX8k2tvQSloynEzMIrHk4miQw== Received: by submission.tobias.gr (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 3597bd84 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO) for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:19:16 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:19:22 +0000 From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Guix Consensus Document process Message-ID: <950A7B8C-1A58-4A42-91AA-414D95ABFEB8@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Autocrypt: addr=me@HIDDEN; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBFVks2ABEACjGBPhWf/qx0L9OhEIrAFTimo5dHa1FLy0AHaHvxmwYSIdJmERYGiNle1rcOvw cFRtu8KJUsrs27Vgoso3qHJpghVitUUf0v3ZuXQT9kfuQLz1Y8pyMzHwVFMLiJVj4Z3y7CJk+xyZ cpSAMbyPINbFVEhsK+z+8ojVGuaiucZkib6b67ySG6Pp1bon8xVvosj71ZRjfXh1t4X8laWO7fQq itT9lmc6DxbE/4vIhR+Vb2MblaA+DyHoNHGGao89h4CO99lfzWzsux41DnEG9d317sJRQTig6Wja EKHXZRA9FbfogD4SDa2uQYCpTJpsVjAyZyu2fuJ+t0zJJ+Ai9qDY87P6hOyd+/n8Eh2Y4TbxJiDo XUT72XY/RfPH1qrMIP3EI/NNL4LQeGG1n+625k3OVWcRVXG2vRrB6qurLmGkLEmjXWCFD9cCRGfH LeajLm9sM+t/nZPZ3btetcmK9tM2EwivyLUNhrTk73UUnI4CSAzdO2cISqo9zSMtFgj2alqd2fOR s7CKfEn+5PquruDbp/Ej7dOOrjgWSCXLDDYXRrtaKrLz/dhqq5ftFYi9tUTTQecFotM08fPtu+Kw JMP2ySHCkUqp0GvrUCeSRPAJZsmJrd535y+LlRhnqb0mbG4dgMa8A6xhkFYugnqldy/q7kX1EmRI 686N7bA6fh1MCQARAQABtCRUb2JpYXMgR2VlcmluY2t4LVJpY2UgPG1lQHRvYmlhcy5ncj6JAlIE EwEKADwCHgECF4ACGQECGwMWIQT1vFU0w28Ah7OdNu8cncT+udt8SwUCXpe0rAYLCQgHCgQFFQoJ CAsFFgMCAQAACgkQHJ3E/rnbfEu5IhAAk+0BW/twLmx1xMmeXn+I7Ne6SG3++0TRBduEaGWV3n59 lX6XPZUQdAPpS4uy0H+c90Owkw+aWUEwfyOWphrxZRtR2cCOP/3Pxj3Vgtz5RkY4u27lMj15jqa/ p7l2l256ZKJOegr9TvOWtkhMp5lxeVHT6f/44Kv/r/8mMCgSnLXYrEWPE462xI+mIJOanHLJb6No f2xLRCvXoLLp7Yejjv1dwOO71R9PMRhtNy46pZM1ylQ++UTkeSocJw4aNtiu0DHOkX9AlNBkutIx x07RpO+MqJKlzzLeQiC/fE5+dR2itRONopwXAqN3MuT7MonQo5XifBn+VK8i9xZWTXZDkWItWtCC 8oIj4zwxwFWiTmMwwSbI3Wdd/11Zw3CLc4Gd0M6NVgvAnuErQXSgr4lrWhZcncvi4L6EJTc9AUSa 8UWPF+S9t+CHTukpJmcYnsccMkOBhT7OZlmWBsylrYK/JTRWqgWSHWdSKmOuLK+MGDneOZEHkEcf jeXRWvmG7MSU5tE/p7NDLIg9vkvhQV9b0q4OtY65uNWbRe2QRJaYMDcYUAeSZzivRa8VaoVen6tb FvH44zpCxubn23ABl9YIzwvJC++r+H2qLdLpy0cfITiZadZ74Ae0aosNw7XARS6OY+A03BfXyPiI 2oW0jf/PdH9sh2mQrQxIQJ5cZz6Z3X20MFRvYmlhcyBHZWVyaW5ja3gtUmljZSAodG9iaWFzLmdy KSA8bWVAdG9iaWFzLmdyPokCNgQwAQoAIBYhBPW8VTTDbwCHs5027xydxP6523xLBQJZUuJkAh0g AAoJEBydxP6523xLwEoP/iaVWdICefmaZ+bkdUg6hwTKxSPlYdLoaCxYI5V2NnZYXG0dy47E7WJP 4EmTDldcne4UG5NyCgXPSMZDNMqcddEMNbmlssTcLKyu6R/VvTcuL3pEhNoLzm9t2IHR/YGAHJIc pyfmJ3amGSlsbo6s6Vv+mbrJTRPIDpLUst/PDoGYihcSKTxoIw8RtNAy+FAliIdJ8ZuPA3BTxQei sQzgWJo68UInvnFp4juq0zupNDqKddemI8kZCRK/fFPBDD71nqiSJjx2tvbjkTiPU9gmTp7Nulgj ZATZIt0pUhn87w15ItzrsiEjTYCMTmHY5wnvyLarFKZLzQjgUJfsbv4WRJRnX0/EEJWMvMtSdtXL fjwTLrSGAr4vh13PMfE6uVkGkeCV/8BfGJqRE4zkI+QOVILw6VSAP6sdtGSGb52bcCuPj7p9zGIB IuKFudT+DzUb5uV2jbahSjJ8X4Ak/ruG2Hv3iICZawDpHV1JDNgY910KNi5T6gFrjFA2G6aiXDCO SlToLPnPBYH85UVOsp2VykE9AREKS7a7o76cibjwBNN+4xJqJRxhs9YH4JKzE3w/ptVnx49QFBGc pjPkzMTs7DtanD8iqL4J6afnycv9KqIlNJONaMHvzxeunV7QCsoF6DdusZJKFMexiDBaOFUmGFFS XfzK2oNjknx1QApyTPvhiQJpBBMBCgBTAhsvAh4BAheAAhkBBAsJCAcFFQoJCAsFFgMCAQASGGhr cDovL3BncC5taXQuZWR1FiEE9bxVNMNvAIeznTbvHJ3E/rnbfEsFAllS4TwFCRa6MNwACgkQHJ3E /rnbfEuMFg//csSmcerqM+h1jwlKPJ4UiLXj3kFxSuSr0DrJzgLIpjuMdB2bhJ3YZwJTrZI9P7DP v+ebTKoeCjxoi5zJcINakZ9/FBn3cOCsYmpdHdaOPm34pHh9c0y9+NAvGJvugBRWIWK3qYYJzjff YL1r5lGCM4FXuhTcjVTTs5iCvYlAhtnHEAM6+c+mftdwrCJaqCiz3G13OCtpujn8fOn/B2nv6ZdT hen3Xqh3xBU2PnxPhVtyOulsJ318SKbUAk0h3tbLLkzFIS+7XvpHuwB72NkZw233IAN1Uq/nmJK/ YIsi+icNGpI60+PnLFiqYrSmtD6BCf8pOPq+isscu5uTuhfHt8fjLZPiqyf12CLoNKIp94sUi/1n M75GKz9MPWs6vqosq+E1xs9wVBw0gwUluejWgg3mIE3754W6xQ6tnpspdrt+x5kykfPMD3r1T8uq +z4ZUtE3A6QIjjxzIN0Xk8ZpC5Mg3yUzhyM1qF4e8pM2U7/tJC9BO5CNWJmKBqmGZ5sYw85wjEZ+ WnfU770tgCGZjcjIYjqYuoCgHMd2J8pkXdf76CINWK4+fCoKHr/4kWfU3e8ikFStTBer/Bu5tXa5 RPh90F6l2DNRitUdv+7vAiFnAuP61ZSUSqRbOiE1SPTv4cGBOCgB7xIOU6+rKzlweR/vO0otLZc+ TyFnSKPrfzg= X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (-) I support it=2E Kind regards, T G-R Sent on the go=2E Excuse or enjoy my brevity=2E
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 09:10:47 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 04:10:47 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39209 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tatEd-000214-2M for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 04:10:47 -0500 Received: from smtp21.cstnet.cn ([159.226.251.21]:51800 helo=cstnet.cn) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zhengjunjie@HIDDEN>) id 1tatEX-00020Z-HG for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 04:10:45 -0500 Received: from m (unknown [107.174.64.25]) by APP-01 (Coremail) with SMTP id qwCowACHj2+CB5JnkC3uCA--.6585S2; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 17:10:30 +0800 (CST) From: Zheng Junjie <zhengjunjie@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:44:08 +0100") References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: mu4e 1.12.7; emacs 30.0.92 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 17:10:18 +0800 Message-ID: <87zfjhgakl.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-CM-TRANSID: qwCowACHj2+CB5JnkC3uCA--.6585S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjDUn29KB7ZKAUJUUUUU529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7v73 VFW2AGmfu7bjvjm3AaLaJ3UjIYCTnIWjp_UUUYf7k0a2IF6FyUM7kC6x804xWl14x267AK xVWUJVW8JwAFc2x0x2IEx4CE42xK8VAvwI8IcIk0rVWrJVCq3wAFIxvE14AKwVWUJVWUGw A2ocxC64kIII0Yj41l84x0c7CEw4AK67xGY2AK021l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r4j 6ryUM28EF7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26r4j6F4UM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_Gr 1j6F4UJwA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI0_Cr1j6rxdM2vj62AExVA0xI801c8C04v2 6x02cVCv0xWle2I262IYc4CY6c8Ij28IcVAaY2xG8wASzI0EjI02j7AqF2xKxwAqx4xG64 xvF2IEw4CE5I8CrVC2j2WlYx0E2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lYx0Ex4A2jsIE14v26r1j 6r4UMcvjeVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvEwIxGrwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwCFx2 IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwC20s026c02F40E14v26r1j6r18MI8I3I0E7480Y4vE14v2 6r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jrv_JF1lIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY67 AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVCF04k26cxKx2IY s7xG6r1j6r1xMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr 0_GrUvcSsGvfC2KfnxnUUI43ZEXa7IUbk9N7UUUUU== X-Originating-IP: [107.174.64.25] X-CM-SenderInfo: x2kh0wxmxqyx3h6l2u1dvotugofq/ X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: > Hi all, > > Here is the Guix Consensus Document (GCD) process which implements how > we will collectively make decision on *significant* changes. Since it > bootstraps the process, it=E2=80=99s important to have a common understan= ding of > it. > > If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by > email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org your reply, either: > > =E2=80=A2 I support; > =E2=80=A2 I accept; > =E2=80=A2 I disapprove. > I support. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEfr6klGDOXiwIdX/bO1qpk+Gi3/AFAmeSB3oACgkQO1qpk+Gi 3/As+w/+OK7eeei3C8zz3+gK2aBVqCO/TeDD67NOVWewQzLdI7rqizdM9jyuAAbf G+OSOAoasnnOtY9Bmaiwe133lefAij84Mt5aiJsWzzyiSKwk9jTYxLaU2Uk7WZGv w9GeQGLJnS87GANlnaEK4IVkNCvp22XbbXHvkG/JaCLzl+8KNCqSxWaqeXyjNc3D rluvkeyuz2cUrV7gWt2R2v5ioq6AtUHL+ZTNsc1AdHVACY02IWgoFFc2k3sxAu2A KWBu0oVqH5BHby+wz/fV6Ax1Q+MPoSvNYAfteQHTyUt6UoA3OPrOV8bulD2rQjw6 3lf3fLVFbnqEe4Waw4nAYjFevIhkUDtnZ1XdXmM4w/jD8ITELl8L4zIy4VBHwzkc IkBBfq9JqVUMR1jgKKVC51gUSXPq9Wj62aA5EUmWjmrd5WB6XwhG2OGlqWTVxUhJ ZYJAdHczdy147TdinSpPpRrnvgTtjYTym6kX80huOHewgMZFJcij/Zmo/nt5HoC9 ZDM//wWIt0CMr+Brm7Q//Zb7vFD8L87/pnra7fTiNXVefro3XqQCPqewi61YlrgB SjjTNi6p4hXpT/NiiYGbGb9tfznXn49uSG6eedFJ2StSvf2fvUThjLaIihkmjJMO H6zTZt+8MyF5VRRQxbQIRGuZtzO/r7Of1AeeHnkGhFpRAJoo0Bo= =eYOd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 09:01:19 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 04:01:19 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39154 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tat5S-0001VI-TZ for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 04:01:19 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52508) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <janneke@HIDDEN>) id 1tat5N-0001Ux-Vh for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 04:01:16 -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 <janneke@HIDDEN>) id 1tat5G-0001ts-UY; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 04:01:06 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=W6bAS/aZ6wyvNzhAyuBTHiehBSojHz+c6csgkhsCUwM=; b=g3kFmTlB0wax85/18VR0 rTzAWWbQXipZ6sqI7L11PVQXTN47BYF88zBlXGrc0CordL2bcXfkn7eiHg7LJ/o3Ex6UX3L8jRctg tF6zGlzCwqH94+MxsoM3dOqJ81pdouGpR09fbGjWuRKkQ6vg1jLMESTSBx0vSrq3Pmse5ENZoWU9O RwhdkkxgDx1uemt2Rh91qyMwgbMdQU/kktzAlmwwj19VuM2vcFiwVvILUpjF6tz54QVtT9yfK9v4C aNpLeVObR0clRKRZ8cD7dM8UCX1lfZlqCJNNFlUcKABJGyktgjofrVQ/UnOLX4cSCrFEvR6/zAxHx b/OhlE1EZHLiYg==; From: Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:44:08 +0100") Organization: AvatarAcademy.nl References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Url: http://AvatarAcademy.nl Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 10:01:03 +0100 Message-ID: <8734h9ewfk.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 (---) Simon Tournier writes: > Here is the Guix Consensus Document (GCD) process which implements how > we will collectively make decision on *significant* changes. Since it > bootstraps the process, it=E2=80=99s important to have a common understan= ding of > it. > > If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by > email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org your reply, either: > > =E2=80=A2 I support; > =E2=80=A2 I accept; > =E2=80=A2 I disapprove. I support! Greetings, Janneke --=20 Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN> | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com | Avatar=C2=AE https://AvatarAcade= my.com
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 08:31:18 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 03:31:18 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39114 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tascQ-0008Rz-Gm
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 03:31:18 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38992)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tascM-0008Rg-Hr
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 03:31:16 -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 1tascH-0004DT-0u; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 03:31:09 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=UopoG3CjNbnCQAEGncZvC9jClmwVfkbBo9Z9f8Z8jcM=; b=LM5FBNT9QiDQNGb/V/Pv
CJLoRCspWOTXPqp3nEV30Pun7eHyns3/Un0ySUcx6UnY2mHks8ggc6oLQAdlJLnM0Z9FmorTiFkKk
llOu0/wCnjDaTlSaNl5pt6j2dJv2G3JNw/G2lI9NmkEPxxJkVxDF5wv2LUepSPlGH6pD3a9IXJvTn
Ii0DNuMrDLSVw7T0hNC+vk8qS3BaBkee4sRkqO5sZcRHB4M3Nw/Z2vEeR7jK4trOGe9WWDuVfpa0s
YS/s8pf75q/pvS0L0ytpa5eiagZhgElMGpUCyWMYHDA0TCYa+l4kvunB3jf0GUh8w9QghkOHzOZ15
Yvj4X4Ttpx77rw==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 22
Jan 2025 20:49:55 +0100")
References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:30:59 +0100
Message-ID: <87plkegce4.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
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,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> skribis:
> title: Guix Consensus Document Process
> id: 001
> status: submitted
> discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
> authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
> sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus
> date: 2025-12-08
> SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
> ---
>
> # Summary
>
> This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the
> GNU Guix project, later referenced as either Guix or =E2=80=9Cthe project=
=E2=80=9C, for
> brevity. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
> structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes affecting
> the project. It aims to draw the attention of community members on
> important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to weigh
> in.
I support.
\o/
Ludo=E2=80=99.
PS: I guess this can be committed to the new repo now, even in
=E2=80=98submitted=E2=80=99 state, no? We should add =E2=80=98.guix-au=
thorizations=E2=80=99 and a
keyring branch though.
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=SWSi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 08:16:16 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 03:16:15 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39075 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tasNr-0007hE-Li for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 03:16:15 -0500 Received: from smtp-8fa8.mail.infomaniak.ch ([83.166.143.168]:52071) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <tanguy@HIDDEN>) id 1tasNm-0007gp-Vj for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 03:16:13 -0500 Received: from smtp-3-0001.mail.infomaniak.ch (smtp-3-0001.mail.infomaniak.ch [10.4.36.108]) by smtp-3-3000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Ydv0M2F6YzSJ6; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:16:03 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bioneland.org; s=20230804; t=1737620163; bh=vZ5wiVfq8+0k8oYRfHbgRJJD9dNPVhZBB4qCP43ZMRo=; h=References:Subject:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Date:From; b=P/tWbYuTRGPpYaO5Qp+aoS3E4hrbAXxIkl8cPSiRDm1ZsTGtd1NiEq2U+x3Yk3l2i 5D19ovOn7MeohsRfOof7Z92Erl+xpZ5cWArmLINWgqrupad4YrZCAapDb2cl8VwfpV n/wEt1GgzmzQpOwjd50Xk6NKWJcAbBWwILQvs3mCyxmepxZxaoFcNCUfeE6RAPyGro s+Ldszdrz77U67B40rx0o4p1RZTR6mC8NiHsILFKxd2mjsoTWRqVRhhYQZi5AwDr/9 nhq57jsUTYZIfDJGE3T2MDQp7Xz7yXw6r78jDfXGc/+OI/jh8EnxytnleuVOzQLgXP 6RnxxylUjw1Yg== Received: from unknown by smtp-3-0001.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4Ydv0L6ctWzWl5; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:16:02 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?b?4oCT?= deliberation From: Tanguy LE CARROUR <tanguy@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:16:02 +0100 Message-ID: <173762016239.4039.14487640896355982743@HIDDEN> User-Agent: alot/0.10 X-Infomaniak-Routing: alpha X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-) Quoting Simon Tournier (2025-01-22 20:44:08) > If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by > email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org your reply, either: >=20 > =E2=80=A2 I support; > =E2=80=A2 I accept; > =E2=80=A2 I disapprove. I support! --=20 Tanguy
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 07:45:08 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 02:45:08 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38986 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tartk-0003OK-0D for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 02:45:08 -0500 Received: from mx.boiledscript.com ([88.99.243.112]:60762) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <hako@HIDDEN>) id 1tartg-00038h-GU for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 02:45:05 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 15:44:52 +0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ultrarare.space; s=mail; t=1737618302; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=oewMMTAFSGJVn2/aHIW51nP7RW8SS31pd3qX58B9O5U=; b=IeODeezXtJ9mN0OPvqrP/Wwy4LPSUWznDdTJzN1SnGMddgHagrbO7dspAcdU/QPnvNNfIc El1Lu7uy3osk+RugrUsOZaRNRbWKg8N6G6s//+k1uZpQKNKje6281ZFV97j39D+Hlj0UC0 +8VhqX4R7BNDIR4SuI9MWaBqjqstBT26j1ekXQHVLOX1bboLqbgdBFmUfG37+4XhXxtqas OHSukXKrztMIfo3/9itLZSlu6OMs/kQTxv/2V7b6rVc/DnxCgytxHgP/twfeGS8N4rHZsO eZCdeJ+DEjsjGvZTS2T079uqg+ljxwHRUDzup9g3DuJHevmr1dL7rhI8HwBIEQ== Message-ID: <87r04uynwr.wl-hako@HIDDEN> From: Hilton Chain <hako@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [FWD] Guix Consensus Document process =?BIG5?Q?=A1V?= deliberation In-Reply-To: <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="pgp-sign-Multipart_Thu_Jan_23_15:44:48_2025-1"; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (-) --pgp-sign-Multipart_Thu_Jan_23_15:44:48_2025-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=BIG5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SSBzdXBwb3J0Lg0KDQo+IFsuLi5dDQo+ICAgICAgICBkcmFmdCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg c3VibWl0dGVkICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGZpbmFsDQo+ICstLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LSsgICAgKy0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSsgICArLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tKw0K PiB8IFN1Ym1pc3Npb24gUGVyaW9kICB8ICAgIHwgIERpc2N1c3Npb24gUGVyaW9kICB8ICAgfCBE ZWxpYmVyYXRpb24gUGVyaW9kIHwNCj4gfCAgKHVwIHRvIDcgZGF5cykgICAgfC1YLT58ICAgKDMw oVY2MCBkYXlzKSAgICAgIHwtLT58ICAgICAoMTQgZGF5cykJICAgICAgfA0KPiArLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0rIDogICstLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0rICAgKy0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLSsNCg0KRXh0cmEgdGFiIGFmdGVyICIoMTQgZGF5cykiIDopDQo= --pgp-sign-Multipart_Thu_Jan_23_15:44:48_2025-1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYKAB0WIQT0wtHfP97qY9HTB3asxm0JylKCkgUCZ5HzcAAKCRCsxm0JylKC khc5AQCsxnqqjgsGO5Za5jK1GUT6YAYK8zU4FF6oQXl6a0eG8wD+OKG969NfeAXp dGOZijB4Ddel4o5JbVZEyeEb7FgmjAQ= =xkpJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pgp-sign-Multipart_Thu_Jan_23_15:44:48_2025-1--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 05:10:14 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 00:10:14 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38612 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tapTp-0003dr-Nk
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:10:14 -0500
Received: from mx2.dismail.de ([159.69.191.136]:34223)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <jgart@HIDDEN>) id 1talpj-0007sa-VC
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:16:38 -0500
Received: from mx2.dismail.de (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mx2.dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id ce644424;
Thu, 23 Jan 2025 02:16:27 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=dismail.de; h=from:to:cc
:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type;
s=20190914; bh=ajehQt9iHaIlzvGHFXTM5tNb/BAJS19OvJe+YNnv9i8=; b=
M8eChTZRZnu6zmwE+hSTv3Mkkl0j97/Og+m4DxRKNxcJwZesrJL64L+G7vlbpdwc
xa9uHbyfVmmBcH2GRhztfvtTpTEdLbbgplyKszr0UEok4zbVEwRrtzi549SFYI+G
A4w6v7kIhentuOTL/+SEHM49X7Q32t+C31LN94eqFKBvKS8/WFxV0xSL1nQrFgTu
40Lcf/tPT1LcbY655ei0diLGtTj1GXUbMWgkrv2eIHbiXDLGj9nyX0EmVII2EHF4
0hwTWnRI71u9yDkSqViYQ0OVLhCRy7iqSLvWb29RL07zuh77HZMy4CIKQH0JY0XH
tudXnhrDSTSRziMZpToewA==
Received: from smtp2.dismail.de (<unknown> [10.240.26.12])
by mx2.dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 44f0e16f;
Thu, 23 Jan 2025 02:16:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from smtp2.dismail.de (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp2.dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 6f6beb23;
Thu, 23 Jan 2025 02:16:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: by dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 120210b4
(TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO);
Thu, 23 Jan 2025 02:16:25 +0100 (CET)
From: jgart <jgart@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <93ea8a5a-884d-4864-bf7b-74cdfce4487e@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 19:16:04 -0600
Message-ID: <87jzamxrcb.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:10:05 -0500
Cc: Ekaitz Zarraga <ekaitz@HIDDEN>,
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>,
pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN>,
Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>, Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>,
Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>,
"Artyom V. Poptsov" <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>,
indieterminacy <indieterminacy@HIDDEN>, reza <reza@HIDDEN>,
Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>,
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: -0.3 (/)
I support
PS
Literally got this when I sent it earlier ;()
Hi!
This is the MAILER-DAEMON, please DO NOT REPLY to this email.
An error has occurred while attempting to deliver a message for
the following list of recipients:
74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org: 550 This message scored 17.3 spam points.
Below is a copy of the original message:
Fun times with debbugs
--
all the best,
jgart
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 05:10:13 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 00:10:13 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38610 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tapTp-0003dc-2Y
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:10:13 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::336]:54666)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tageH-00057N-73
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 14:44:25 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4361815b96cso886175e9.1
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 11:44:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737575059; x=1738179859; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=6Szz62FUqc6gdDwY/Eg3h7nTZe3Foq62gXsdWwKXjZA=;
b=MhrslhSzsz9FGyQiRfEXYle3ai+pmPthLp3ZCq2fPxdgTpgo1zxxLa6KMdxCSoLXsy
h2F1Cq3asLYY7QagY/mDQq74GjuWj5hystA575y7uKUS6oolwKRXBWK9PRcLMqtvPaqq
Mic/85O1gOcpkFGERNLLZRQVZGSYJE8R2ekQ9kYLjKw4p9mscW5+ujr5auaz1j9kj0kK
N1stg4EcSByosi9iCglT2ijng5yKYG2z/zuAowq/0XCLgVq/wGoufc60ILOjc3UofyfJ
dvJIiqoCyHaIfnhfhSma393PG8C7qUE6Ei8ENzeO402g2+ZVlcq2gb8l7/MXEcOPRfTG
DP0g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737575059; x=1738179859;
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=6Szz62FUqc6gdDwY/Eg3h7nTZe3Foq62gXsdWwKXjZA=;
b=txMRWcPar3Pts4HbqeeF8SVs7FBlr1ryT9V9I95n/BY22XvFd5jRKFOEOmHiLVaI82
AyutRACwv1fa2jqFaVsPrWU7EwzmtVo+8VWtB3c4K8to4NuxM6PqIb0bbtOsvy14ungv
vVSYnXR2t6/HED4Di0ZBW+Y7XBbn/zjBzWdzxwNEHIa9cK/VwLdvZUdMzVKCxKG5+lwT
nY0RbG7oSBAQn6HcfC8/sZXrJWxSW2xjNOSenfi458Iw7bAEdZoQb3O2FLUn3KIcLrsm
COvxV3zx0XJ51qUsHSHxh/1ziKliNQSVsNI+pTKK9QZeTSWNQCMvu2ix3RxI75FlMok4
3yYA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCWcMBh14Qbn36ybzj13xH7CnK5IErNaYqxE6ORVdhuLX3y+xl7DPRg7sv8wgWn9+rriXtF8TQ==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyiQmD04ap1/FmHCMN+Yw5wI1LE1LmSclc5SsK5oWvaeD8lFfut
WYVMEGhwmsyImOS9MsXv0pptSWakdHtq1JRKuB8312go4chd2Q7y
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctM70fURdHvut+yEiEJ2C5pNEWLfAWl21TIy7DSuD0/MOxQnS4pRxHpKlF6n5P
FexVW4PbcW4IrnU3EmLw9pEl5lBdt3r3BfMEWnqC0MrzLb4ticDnd7pT/tHX7hTTRd93ABcWRPN
lPABKp+eJaMwOJzQ8ZbeztQTerxLe3zLSomvnd0dnH1/QSkuZNkbSp2cgfpWJBoEw6nIoTZJ5a7
ExI3eqWAvNm8NcMlArMyfisSPOZTGr7e4CYq/n8oMQbHmrUxmJfgmdCg1ZKWXM5lt+f
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEU3o4mWIpuoGy6YyzwO+G0e3tK7plecQB6NekJ3J0ssXSqk1h63V4BU2NZND7LoPE4X3nACQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3d97:b0:436:f960:3427 with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4389142745amr196415805e9.22.1737575058832;
Wed, 22 Jan 2025 11:44:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:3885:25df:9e55:39fd])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-438b31ae155sm35571095e9.20.2025.01.22.11.44.15
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 22 Jan 2025 11:44:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?=
=?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87plkhavzf.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<87tt9ymfqx.fsf@HIDDEN> <87frle6vw3.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<87zfjlktyi.fsf@HIDDEN> <87plkhavzf.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:18:23 +0100
Message-ID: <87ed0umzcw.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
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 Tue, 21 Jan 2025 at 08:47, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: >>
To me, this is to emphasize that what is meant by “significant” will
be >> clarified below. > > OK. That wasn't clear to me. I'd suggest wording
that explicitly, for > example: > > --8<-------- [...]
Content analysis details: (3.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:336 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:10:05 -0500
Cc: GNU Guix maintainers <guix-maintainers@HIDDEN>,
pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, bokr@HIDDEN,
Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>,
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <guix@HIDDEN>,
"Artyom V. Poptsov" <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>,
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.0 (++)
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 Tue, 21 Jan 2025 at 08:47, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: >>
To me, this is to emphasize that what is meant by “significant” will
be >> clarified below. > > OK. That wasn't clear to me. I'd suggest wording
that explicitly, for > example: > > --8<-------- [...]
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:336 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
Hi,
On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 at 08:47, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> w=
rote:
>> To me, this is to emphasize that what is meant by =E2=80=9Csignificant=
=E2=80=9D will be
>> clarified below.
>
> OK. That wasn't clear to me. I'd suggest wording that explicitly, for
> example:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> [...] a proposed change is "significant" (which meaning is clarified
> below)
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> or similar.
I emphasized with *significant* because it=E2=80=99s consistent with the re=
st
(*draft*, *submitted*, *periods*, etc.).
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 05:10:13 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 23 00:10:13 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38608 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tapTo-0003dZ-4b
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:10:12 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x32e.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32e]:45552)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tageC-00057I-O2
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 14:44:21 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x32e.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4361c705434so821685e9.3
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 11:44:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737575054; x=1738179854; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=kGXqugGwHPnn/3MhM4LD/Td1anYmuOotIB6XT91ISIU=;
b=FpCjHwBhl9DgdnpIRKOso+9biqtzj2GXHLQaLnQheJ+34ZtMdbqsPucCHZXfXKeiX6
nk8+aLXzC9LXYMcqL4BYvvhEej9YmKpbH8omoOXmKxypd3O0Bt2i7Ppn6fKjffgocWfC
cenw71sLRhkbcYBixb3meYQ1L5l5K/Ynmx/v+NY/Mq0L14i72eqlRuHfuX0A/6vf2QBu
lTfn4gA1HRI5E4dbxM2OO2IT14IRdVnxl0pDGalKCBKHcAke88DlfLq9copdClGIyUFz
QlbeP5EtfXJJ+hYvdAsg1iHKKA5kWVEzYHsUZj4Z9l9qjcHO/0vp9qfWihzh3ZWly/5R
Wi5g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737575054; x=1738179854;
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=kGXqugGwHPnn/3MhM4LD/Td1anYmuOotIB6XT91ISIU=;
b=ftvFzMG4ffgsR5bnjggD9gJpJqzmoHCu6tc7uU/wLqNFgq/n7aruOazCVlb0n+vytX
xqywFP6IulwH+4s1Xi0MdLylOsibvNF42HGZBhpXPZ0hxUNKK4mnI/pa1KFr1tEA2zQR
ayt2ZhP/YvOZqunhBRd9aN1ebj1wSBxM+rxzjy29xDjJ0AGSI/Z6RUFGH7e4WgBz6tv9
zdgRF5juHSp0hn8Gm4DnOiuzFu48PL8BYhZ3C9tw01UxwN11sCZbXz2jZM5fCsfO3tL/
fE7fukrSri83zWyJ+zEDQMV1VzCQqPU+8H54mg/PTrcf3f4rVIBlFzIyuVNdu/I+UJ/x
jnkg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCWDpMTJRkm/i6w7eHgCBTyQk1Px0EvPKrYtqF8HeWX5aQUDl8v6+aT7prPPaIFus5D4BRrhdg==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxUQOu2t2e8LV8XekXamvmD1XxNcLlLrIRVGJeWJaXWdhaHplGN
QydCToKtySjd7BSpyg6taOaaIpEVeRnL88fPxMu7GQhXyo7IaHD4
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuWnPYG+O15boQVfZONndLHGdy7VKJDuLEqX4CUXXKpsmjdLD2WydkocOAMate
yUTdcCmLCmo9+pNvXgTAaxGu+tFT6OdmY1EzfIOGXim4R9CyX+133EmZkpQ3P+ODfyX9fZanAFt
YXgne+kb/K3/MDU7Yhm0mU8/xUTrSvTGtCwpKvA/yz0l1CF9JvpA0UANbc9li13AhAp+uUvfw8u
MURl40HlbCEWB0QAiNEhe59Ov5EsiHaMingAtambho+R3EPbxU1sP9NfTEagE4aN72r
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHazvP1PfSXQjxiJFn1yIHbguPGCECVBPaZ/3HnJFm1d8lQ//m+Fm4pXLU8s6GKzrvh4sx9WQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3420:b0:436:f3f6:9582 with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-438913cb729mr223650865e9.8.1737575054273;
Wed, 22 Jan 2025 11:44:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:3885:25df:9e55:39fd])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
ffacd0b85a97d-38bf327df12sm17390446f8f.92.2025.01.22.11.44.11
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 22 Jan 2025 11:44:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87frle6vw3.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<87tt9ymfqx.fsf@HIDDEN> <87frle6vw3.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:15:48 +0100
Message-ID: <87ikq6mzh7.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
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 Maxim, Thanks for your comments. All included except one.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 at 11:50, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
Content analysis details: (3.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:32e listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:10:05 -0500
Cc: GNU Guix maintainers <guix-maintainers@HIDDEN>,
pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, bokr@HIDDEN,
Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>,
Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>,
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <guix@HIDDEN>, "Artyom V.
Poptsov" <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.0 (++)
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 Maxim, Thanks for your comments. All included except one.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 at 11:50, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:32e listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
Hi Maxim,
Thanks for your comments. All included except one.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 at 11:50, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> w=
rote:
>> - changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
>> lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.).
>
> Punctuaction rule: I seem to recall that you don't need a trailing dot
> if there is already one, even inside a preceding closing parens [0].
>
> [0] https://english.stackexchange.com/a/8385
Hum, I think here etc. does not act as the last term of the sentence
because it=E2=80=99s inside the parenthesis. It does not appear to me a
double-duty case.
Anyway, in doubt I replaced by =E2=80=99and so on=E2=80=99. :-)
>> The GCD process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, w=
hich include:
>
> The quotes here, again.
Replaced by *significant*, thus it=E2=80=99s consistent with the rest.
>> one sponsor in addition to the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Perio=
d=E2=80=9D below.
>
> Markdown (or at least most flavors in use of it) supports referring to
> sections via URL, IIRC. So I'd use:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> See [Submission Period](#submission-period) below.
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Since it makes the document in plain text harder to read and it does not
bring much, and we do not know yet how these GCDs will be parsed, it
appears to me simpler to keep it that way, for now.
>> ## Cost of Reverting
>>
>> The GCD process described in this document can be amended by subsequent
>> GCDs.
>
> This section name (Cost of Reverting) doesn't match with its content?
I added =E2=80=9CNot applicable=E2=80=9D because it=E2=80=99s hard to predi=
ct the cost of
reverting about something that we have never tried. :-)
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jan 2025 20:56:26 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 22 15:56:26 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36808 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tahly-0000QH-2h for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:56:26 -0500 Received: from dane.soverin.net ([2a10:de80:1:4091:b9e9:2218:0:1]:44025) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ekaitz@HIDDEN>) id 1tahlv-0000Pr-35 for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:56:24 -0500 Received: from smtp.soverin.net (c04smtp-lb01.int.sover.in [10.10.4.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dane.soverin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Ydbvx6bhrzyWW for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:56:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.soverin.net (smtp.soverin.net [10.10.4.100]) by soverin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Ydbvx3wJzzcQ for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:56:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.soverin.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=elenq.tech header.i=@elenq.tech header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=soverin1 header.b=oGKrTUpM; dkim-atps=neutral DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=elenq.tech; s=soverin1; t=1737579373; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=10CDTTwTRgk6w9neUAzxdTaFLuRwHWm+rt8NO5H9b0c=; b=oGKrTUpMAdDHx75z33icmantsCkz/G7S7ZRMcRIuIgeg/m+LBJJUePaqRm/F6NN12VCPaW mpfeCF8jXYl3XvcE9nx5AR7kPdWdMUrDUq0QZ/E3p7rZSwELLE5MTx/kjeJJOpA84NvL29 ZPK5VwqbopTpWKbiOu4h09QECkQ1jXUGzwCOJelSmp7e/PUbKr5yDCXbQOKQww2ddENKjo 5lT6jSIjdi2FQFFBvrW1jdtTIk1syk1q2e0shAi/js807zyEmyNiqKi8d5cSU/wFHZtTQS ID0kAow3aTqimxwS5AigJMuDu9WQXjkRtcAmQaYaKrsl9K/di9Twne6AqpXW4Q== X-CM-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=d/oPyQjE c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=67915b6d a=of5LLA2JpAbEhE3iAJihqg==:117 a=of5LLA2JpAbEhE3iAJihqg==:17 a=MKtGQD3n3ToA:10 a=1oJP67jkp3AA:10 a=5KLPUuaC_9wA:10 a=13zjGPudsaEWiJwPRgMA:9 a=uAnfjm0ZM18_O3uxnx0A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=BfjGXcRxjvCVRtqjRRYA:9 a=FfaGCDsud1wA:10 a=fHwv4uFMmd9ideRqrg8A:9 a=yPy0HX4kI4LsAlP3oO-2:22 X-CM-Envelope: MS4xfHXEmitMX0hnNtDcjEAY7VIxNSmGdJeUSIHfilSdqhRSflnFFubLzq4n+ASGWXa5jILaSqRFR3vW0B4y+1gsByEgOH4OQrnVuslOYHszbEAuswYYcusA LetwpccdZ/Q4jIOv4/vCPpY/68HyhAD3Lsay4/Upd1py17NIUakzicDGAXrbtx6JBwJFuJJgkzJpyw== Message-ID: <93ea8a5a-884d-4864-bf7b-74cdfce4487e@HIDDEN> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 21:56:12 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_Guix_Consensus_Document_process_=E2=80=93_deliberat?= =?UTF-8?Q?ion?= To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Content-Language: en-US, es-ES, eu From: Ekaitz Zarraga <ekaitz@HIDDEN> Autocrypt: addr=ekaitz@HIDDEN; keydata= xsFNBGcvh/QBEACePF16wEeQaqfJNgeaSQB6ty6PzLaYtl8UVApPSCF1PYNEhDtxQOOpBXeu k6h68cjhRX7hmug8mAraXotw4aG4Z3kbUro4fzXOYW3rCi/mAm5NFXLUmBX3E1AV1pcD8hDA 5s3LeGzfTo4xRGTW4zTzxGEyrvbChkVib7wTSk52a/WkFas6l3sXnepF8HmIEOWkwQcYdcuo gaNDFP1kjZYvqfKJXmCZnY+lC8Zfe/vlD/x8FZQYBQ5xgXIfbSR0xlRz/XIHfJv6j+3myUUr 2UKMku1dkjlkhNkyfw+RypQzmbJ0oJ4bk76/ju0nnlN65/LvyeTVUh/2O2VnPnZ49keL8sqr APXF4di4pWT+/mPxfoEtiSDtjyzbr8+ajcwLa4SSKLlexqjZj8X6R4tt31Rf/Pliwe4TdPmd 2leE3BIJl9bAuslEvd5tqZ1oa3Zfb62tvpaJCRYMtOEWuGkYdyrwTW7UXJPQpam4X7WoW2jW c5aTpAnpnqIPzaWJmua1lGQjEXgt4xvVdhVmZq32fkTy/rXw9l5a+XU7N4/Zz8AR/0xO+UBc Q1J+wHADjL8Q0v0tZLEaiWL72AsxN3GMWNPXWAplaTPUNPUlNK0JPHwhTX/cQVkIc9avSKc3 BeUofC96d13I7QmRjQ0gcBaLtV9lMOuYwbC+6tb70x2fQsI3bwARAQABzSJFa2FpdHogWmFy cmFnYSA8ZWthaXR6QGVsZW5xLnRlY2g+wsGUBBMBCAA+FiEEXb4j05BTZSZ/jMdq/blSvT9z VtYFAmcvh/QCGwMFCQPCZwAFCwkIBwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQ/blSvT9zVtbW CRAAkbla35s8RKhQBweqwEcdYDV2Zpt16OgENymjLs/qhh7Y9WgWZ0YraSNYDGCt6lemhior vrXX48+yZC98c8ZgCrr4Hmt8i/6TvJqVhwlZ9//3W/z/YuYDtUPBzRHgwM8tejiXmNqYM8lF Jg64pQaczmGAR29Xf0WTQegSociBSUg9eC7BS74Uh7UbHCgytyretoKmqJAp8SKE/Czt5x4R lXKVgGawzg1GerriwnNbudy0eyl1q0Pn7Q+K+tQ14EPDAM+QsGR/fBV4a3uYP6sBF+SdM+DO LX5MRVbWJ8O3kLmbAKQeLgSLlnYydMY/mTvjgxMAakfGCA4q69gmyDSB0fzAUm3c1JV5VwIo 63rykiOEB/k2m4aiiujH5kOC86sjb273+XXWlOhOEO/vKHHdAh+B7dnEEYUPXnUEMQ23PaF4 22u7C62kw3yH/krKr60t5FxcqNWtCOxEWc0WMZw12Q3Gw8+9oA5DI/f4gjlGvQiQWqj6dvoX vIDmifr0R3sTi6xh+udu2Rp8PsKOW8ZRyQ0/VOiwzBfQkf4PFowaiRp8LnkjLEVft6ruuA1h awO2SKKJ8WpgZPw5oMigZR5DgbunxMD4BcqmD7bSoTRV/ljx1I8UgAaQLPqVVnLt31iENtLv 43kPHl56AbYpAzcvf8nGU3KPhGOoByyuyph4RYDOwU0EZy+H9AEQANc9vw7DnBeNGKhq1Bg5 oiGII7npGXCChe7PB6CJjkvN6n1kXrvBYsaORXvZJPNgmBTKu/ETGYS0t0YeGlI4WTOK9dgB /7T8dngRmrGjPmZjryzfk18tXnJq0zoLixLizDT3FqV4jOG5KjPTxQvpdBMiX9oX4Je2OMqF d14fopLGav0rW7Fh5p83OSREpXbJUJJiUaH3p9U9Ss8IBHzr669PViAqe09EfxL/L0l1JIFj HQjJcg01PUXZAW6aPtd7q6eNCSLTXYPiDRQe2GdRUcB7WfqCogR/LEpzLLcd0NkxCnc0T6da rq2Dupt8rvQ95L4/cOGVcDUDOGE6U92XCkaCvUQkypxQCGKSEjbTFoLRG/4JQj0pAWSaqxPS 7hkTFql4qUAdRwzHN1ib6XedcFfqHSy2Mk5ttW8DaBGKhCm7Mn6+4smXENHSuQxCqHlCQ2m+ 9ogpbxavNVfAblE/ucxyfyo6FlDbGHEG3Yu5296kUPT7PqZLiR3KetMPJfCLY2jVPio3t4tD s7Sj41sG5aIwEApb0Zoz3bPBt5O5GUoPFnXyjO306WLxXrM2tjY38jwHxF1Qvs3HQTJgRei2 g3D3KiiR27cXXs/8lrr8tblr5J1tE4TaQCea5lDuEgTCDLnlcopoYcKpFAUBGQtzcNkudT9w sM2nf9y6INcUE3FlABEBAAHCwXwEGAEIACYWIQRdviPTkFNlJn+Mx2r9uVK9P3NW1gUCZy+H 9AIbDAUJA8JnAAAKCRD9uVK9P3NW1td1D/4xx8AbDKAKx9ezT6GdTZbK6FS66qRQCEzTa5MX ZCEogASOla71CB10l5fFtsRWCtNQLzmgwkFwhdxyjqendDgacc5v/71NBb5KpKni6wDJMeiG s3Lq3ZgWfHte3NZ99iSH+La3aBSFbCloJ/Yf/MJBkzrm1sTTKcgF9/i0pzkume5vtpKRDjjS z4abHu7qk4Sgi5gwWpoKFTT38q6nLP+9SUla3JJjNqU3gvn8kwv6KDMKc4marnSp/c+5O6E+ lNrxMdD0n8+io/Bf/UEI6BU8F7JshPq732bHN1NzUXvgMd4cNsAlvsWM8UCKZ4/usFl1euMM FOvnadZinsTHpXhahJzkYWA7nAKbCoNNq9LPtWxfjHsIfhs+QQafF31Pw+jqHqruB4tH0eiL abrz7kejaZvJdVipNIzRUWYnpP+18khep2UtT1n9VNs6QNb4cHPsoe+s4ga4ZK/klCdEhLya XtbcaNEHb7NZUOBj3HhKFgIY8PD1AptAObHjsUNF5+jfEnl+5WjwyTZTIgDRiOrwn8LWOANQ 0JpR69t06uJwmiogQgnlYe36YFaauHGQZFa+L+R2zgnGn8TnR4C3tH7gNAef9+PKqgmJT5pN IkFzlDmZi05E9xzhj4WQ/OOsqU64eHL2PaDk+2TdfrzNwNFbkABJ+C7BHNAytQ6h9cpUbg== In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------nUSW7kwjMU0YyfRN1V7oOFXB" X-Spampanel-Class: ham X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 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 (-) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --------------nUSW7kwjMU0YyfRN1V7oOFXB Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------ug7St9neskMSGcqkOPGWunfU"; protected-headers="v1" From: Ekaitz Zarraga <ekaitz@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: <93ea8a5a-884d-4864-bf7b-74cdfce4487e@HIDDEN> Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_Guix_Consensus_Document_process_=E2=80=93_deliberat?= =?UTF-8?Q?ion?= References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> --------------ug7St9neskMSGcqkOPGWunfU Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------XMZOHT3YhmZ6H0KB0jTu0spe" --------------XMZOHT3YhmZ6H0KB0jTu0spe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SSBzdXBwb3J0DQo= --------------XMZOHT3YhmZ6H0KB0jTu0spe Content-Type: application/pgp-keys; name="OpenPGP_0xFDB952BD3F7356D6_and_old_rev.asc" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="OpenPGP_0xFDB952BD3F7356D6_and_old_rev.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP public key Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- xsFNBGcvh/QBEACePF16wEeQaqfJNgeaSQB6ty6PzLaYtl8UVApPSCF1PYNEhDtx QOOpBXeuk6h68cjhRX7hmug8mAraXotw4aG4Z3kbUro4fzXOYW3rCi/mAm5NFXLU mBX3E1AV1pcD8hDA5s3LeGzfTo4xRGTW4zTzxGEyrvbChkVib7wTSk52a/WkFas6 l3sXnepF8HmIEOWkwQcYdcuogaNDFP1kjZYvqfKJXmCZnY+lC8Zfe/vlD/x8FZQY BQ5xgXIfbSR0xlRz/XIHfJv6j+3myUUr2UKMku1dkjlkhNkyfw+RypQzmbJ0oJ4b k76/ju0nnlN65/LvyeTVUh/2O2VnPnZ49keL8sqrAPXF4di4pWT+/mPxfoEtiSDt jyzbr8+ajcwLa4SSKLlexqjZj8X6R4tt31Rf/Pliwe4TdPmd2leE3BIJl9bAuslE vd5tqZ1oa3Zfb62tvpaJCRYMtOEWuGkYdyrwTW7UXJPQpam4X7WoW2jWc5aTpAnp nqIPzaWJmua1lGQjEXgt4xvVdhVmZq32fkTy/rXw9l5a+XU7N4/Zz8AR/0xO+UBc Q1J+wHADjL8Q0v0tZLEaiWL72AsxN3GMWNPXWAplaTPUNPUlNK0JPHwhTX/cQVkI c9avSKc3BeUofC96d13I7QmRjQ0gcBaLtV9lMOuYwbC+6tb70x2fQsI3bwARAQAB zSJFa2FpdHogWmFycmFnYSA8ZWthaXR6QGVsZW5xLnRlY2g+wsGUBBMBCAA+FiEE Xb4j05BTZSZ/jMdq/blSvT9zVtYFAmcvh/QCGwMFCQPCZwAFCwkIBwIGFQoJCAsC BBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQ/blSvT9zVtbWCRAAkbla35s8RKhQBweqwEcdYDV2Zpt1 6OgENymjLs/qhh7Y9WgWZ0YraSNYDGCt6lemhiorvrXX48+yZC98c8ZgCrr4Hmt8 i/6TvJqVhwlZ9//3W/z/YuYDtUPBzRHgwM8tejiXmNqYM8lFJg64pQaczmGAR29X f0WTQegSociBSUg9eC7BS74Uh7UbHCgytyretoKmqJAp8SKE/Czt5x4RlXKVgGaw zg1GerriwnNbudy0eyl1q0Pn7Q+K+tQ14EPDAM+QsGR/fBV4a3uYP6sBF+SdM+DO LX5MRVbWJ8O3kLmbAKQeLgSLlnYydMY/mTvjgxMAakfGCA4q69gmyDSB0fzAUm3c 1JV5VwIo63rykiOEB/k2m4aiiujH5kOC86sjb273+XXWlOhOEO/vKHHdAh+B7dnE EYUPXnUEMQ23PaF422u7C62kw3yH/krKr60t5FxcqNWtCOxEWc0WMZw12Q3Gw8+9 oA5DI/f4gjlGvQiQWqj6dvoXvIDmifr0R3sTi6xh+udu2Rp8PsKOW8ZRyQ0/VOiw zBfQkf4PFowaiRp8LnkjLEVft6ruuA1hawO2SKKJ8WpgZPw5oMigZR5DgbunxMD4 BcqmD7bSoTRV/ljx1I8UgAaQLPqVVnLt31iENtLv43kPHl56AbYpAzcvf8nGU3KP hGOoByyuyph4RYDOwU0EZy+H9AEQANc9vw7DnBeNGKhq1Bg5oiGII7npGXCChe7P B6CJjkvN6n1kXrvBYsaORXvZJPNgmBTKu/ETGYS0t0YeGlI4WTOK9dgB/7T8dngR mrGjPmZjryzfk18tXnJq0zoLixLizDT3FqV4jOG5KjPTxQvpdBMiX9oX4Je2OMqF d14fopLGav0rW7Fh5p83OSREpXbJUJJiUaH3p9U9Ss8IBHzr669PViAqe09EfxL/ L0l1JIFjHQjJcg01PUXZAW6aPtd7q6eNCSLTXYPiDRQe2GdRUcB7WfqCogR/LEpz LLcd0NkxCnc0T6darq2Dupt8rvQ95L4/cOGVcDUDOGE6U92XCkaCvUQkypxQCGKS EjbTFoLRG/4JQj0pAWSaqxPS7hkTFql4qUAdRwzHN1ib6XedcFfqHSy2Mk5ttW8D aBGKhCm7Mn6+4smXENHSuQxCqHlCQ2m+9ogpbxavNVfAblE/ucxyfyo6FlDbGHEG 3Yu5296kUPT7PqZLiR3KetMPJfCLY2jVPio3t4tDs7Sj41sG5aIwEApb0Zoz3bPB t5O5GUoPFnXyjO306WLxXrM2tjY38jwHxF1Qvs3HQTJgRei2g3D3KiiR27cXXs/8 lrr8tblr5J1tE4TaQCea5lDuEgTCDLnlcopoYcKpFAUBGQtzcNkudT9wsM2nf9y6 INcUE3FlABEBAAHCwXwEGAEIACYWIQRdviPTkFNlJn+Mx2r9uVK9P3NW1gUCZy+H 9AIbDAUJA8JnAAAKCRD9uVK9P3NW1td1D/4xx8AbDKAKx9ezT6GdTZbK6FS66qRQ CEzTa5MXZCEogASOla71CB10l5fFtsRWCtNQLzmgwkFwhdxyjqendDgacc5v/71N Bb5KpKni6wDJMeiGs3Lq3ZgWfHte3NZ99iSH+La3aBSFbCloJ/Yf/MJBkzrm1sTT KcgF9/i0pzkume5vtpKRDjjSz4abHu7qk4Sgi5gwWpoKFTT38q6nLP+9SUla3JJj NqU3gvn8kwv6KDMKc4marnSp/c+5O6E+lNrxMdD0n8+io/Bf/UEI6BU8F7JshPq7 32bHN1NzUXvgMd4cNsAlvsWM8UCKZ4/usFl1euMMFOvnadZinsTHpXhahJzkYWA7 nAKbCoNNq9LPtWxfjHsIfhs+QQafF31Pw+jqHqruB4tH0eiLabrz7kejaZvJdVip NIzRUWYnpP+18khep2UtT1n9VNs6QNb4cHPsoe+s4ga4ZK/klCdEhLyaXtbcaNEH b7NZUOBj3HhKFgIY8PD1AptAObHjsUNF5+jfEnl+5WjwyTZTIgDRiOrwn8LWOANQ 0JpR69t06uJwmiogQgnlYe36YFaauHGQZFa+L+R2zgnGn8TnR4C3tH7gNAef9+PK qgmJT5pNIkFzlDmZi05E9xzhj4WQ/OOsqU64eHL2PaDk+2TdfrzNwNFbkABJ+C7B HNAytQ6h9cpUbsbBTQRlYksiARAA2N4O9blv9AlWlZufzm6k4nEF1yUbodbmnyBY lFGaAKdVd1fPW9y2f5tHC/GDR8U8bMfLCiDGExpTrwEQDIkqQ75JqX+aS5+U+/lb yvdBTr/z5KdbTTU/rb3dJv+wufPt/bO7Tfl6aW41UbRbkl2NGhXvK6Yr2bCsb/rT 1B1J0ELM178IMdBkJfAF/fSBPo++TSZgRxVYNtIHimu0FcpruuvYsdvs1PLxqDin +ZyEtKhtZv767cEd2brsll/fxP7j/eWoV+RE1rY4Uw2xJjBGkaXq8G3MwXsJHRES d+L0a73q6ikANcR16D7MeDZCzKHDkRUkgibL3l3IFpVPqVCDmHClAAESYx4aFqFB +C2beRDm+1NewGmDJgE1FzwqqvBt4xF6uotDtSdaGwiRiERtNkfRohqeM61br9oZ sqAJnneMWGQLX/Vo3G8Irpw5DBiMbHHUpXxB//XbezxnRL5GdHTUgk26eHLTCOIw H6GwCy0XjEhsdQoD4tNSetWv5/0oEeugIkSWQsgtbtlewCtawTgGMzlOFKHj8/sh dSO3K42VgEFaOg5Zpl1vtvZf5YdqCuYzrjRHLyOqovrTwmMaQ4VIWXmIKhVPv8YB pTI/1xr8LiBZaVYPaLxTIOpsbJDglT/cTRKf6h4h6gcmLuTUXCE6P8/9wVIpnV00 +CkqtnEAEQEAAcLBdgQgAQgAIBYhBIP6Z0VYwFKUZX5MGbeZTPiZcgsmBQJnL4lY Ah0AAAoJELeZTPiZcgsmy2QQALiKBZv4L9Z2CpwHsaMuWilANMTkP9jZSazk5NIL sNtw4ckDnxUu++iwKGqi4gdA49b6pxzREdkkAlsJXEeWtH+36y5DxfofMSRqEBV7 gBtOPyBCZYSWxLqqn2AA1inViQgb+jqhNZOtdXbq8KEQnzi/2QihHPoGjnxuNUaP rFVILq9GPXXwoNcITEdSTAsTKvCCOqXHG50GfegDpkMbMCk0QM9aQOGmO4JStc8b QfX8+0V0B44q1X/lIEopwnHqPvHVDK36Jm0Zjb50apTjw90T4dCpf3wWx4AYb7eG OOR1hhj8GnDsFX2JD6lnBG/Hy7tLzeH6AsacTWujLc6Jzn4ZXTs9hxijWghyqiY7 cYb+xkMHD4zdRS5KwikoEs1MtH9/QGVdbNV9SjZAr+XoOlCEH+6I7T27AW+6Ycwu IeP4NMMSwLSwjXkwXjo+QrXncRylyU51wUQg2hFZbgj44rfUPlVMoF8cQ+DAqV9O MGX8CsZxXRPHw3XFTbjnH8e0bJReFv6506Sq/Skg/xRrGiUuc4RJplfEU/YGFaOI kNRxIYKXW1QaB5TuLWDRIno0sS8th8PxAajegKlEt0otsXVwsL9kjQAl7H2gZmC9 hP9EznhH6X9b7SaBoCS9ByS6svyIOh9n+16poLOaWQX+/47oez2cFmmibAAtNHbF TiTEzsFNBGViSyIBEADCIDw6SWPWjoRYhSAsefFzDNvAJ8lD3Td/bdAPFZFG7Lyl x+njalGY/0N8jXGa5JwE9b4p7/RTf+LglJ7GqhCqfpkQGIM5jX3iZElrjM5gNOH3 CEiAc97CVEdMP+fbVovEMZTZ+yEejHAAN5Rw1wvimIfWX4WjgEX2p9TOj6cuoGJb VEBkkj11PNO4p5kGYfBhU4vIlM2u7xrgRJ2jURoZoUfm5TMB0qlVjeIA/NXvHUgB It8zUbC6AV53h1Kk3CTB77E+XDpO3BjKFQFiH3wNhCln64HWue0MPsPtDj6lhHyq F8J8rd+U5fi8ZezAGgBvUee+tMoYJH9y5pwTT95ukrWfBb9PRnZ+XBkm1Z6KHxw5 IOD0A0w+mhs/Wn90pxlYPZ29WZtV26rZ2MBvSb0IXI4FgB8Kzy5BwHLyrX2FjXuM IoqzI1zF8QA2NPIN90hHITyUdq+KYMLbSUuJB1CdiEFJkh/+N0TuT5H7VrArnGBn mhtWj6/hgJHiiEtTNzmRrqoXfNNJpbaYh+93i161DxfH4J4AvkhjKx1y387oWkcT zWFG7HRfsEZL40UjuLQpklaYHz7B7uXpqGYIsdYokzuxhXaOy+p9QMt6BeForaMX NBnG7u5bWJWRxpg57FU1QC2q7bCVdprkl6VnI0Il8gtIFJCJFA/9z47YFcSvMQAR AQABwsF2BBgBCAAgFiEEg/pnRVjAUpRlfkwZt5lM+JlyCyYFAmViSyICGwwACgkQ t5lM+JlyCyayGg//QlxnJMEQqI7kcz9K+vvP0bzQ3NNwkntlte1q0mqGIIkW/oeW rCPwC8qsPkEYMF2abdIvYTYgwnv22g+tprnyMoyhYx6AFkmCbmeVSt71p66OhmsV lC2LdfnOHOC89ndZ0iuo/BdwsWKOwRZOmnzrrI2H4ftB8sE4XGGPsfiuWfuEnSXo wy4i+QMyZ9luRrf1YiuZyMJe7kUKWsjHPc5iPMrVE9jScaL6tf30/ZwfFT8JWyUx Pc7yKn6h4faPQKceaPMk2kgshlMrvfIf5JasRcuBwDySbv9yZIjGgiOOWXQqkUdS yMIbZltpW+969Kz/9EtXCovnoQOKEL8IlMO84V18O5qs0gCdElk/dlcthvGfKqoM McH0HHRWQMiQC9a4BD0JYzU/dVYG3OgwlJGtl1uQasoRAXktJ9YCtIWF2zPRSnoE bGcZZkQF2uChlwsK+ATSupPs5Cj4rXs427XC4HCkh2vPx8hzZFu8R0fjDdesdnpU D5kNndCHp9R4LCvfPt6a5VBsGSFQqmtXXUqFtJZVNycxrCqzAImG1oP6zlxYpUSW 7oY35WiwVZnyPFZUUEaHD/lhB9JbFFq7Y1WhnAY9f2JyKE/s0+nz0l8D7KwbwFhI 35fBx3tReHGG/roDw8FE3dbNlI9rRdP34Qhz8vbF8sfxCC94KsgcPTNkc/Q=3D =3DPoCH -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- --------------XMZOHT3YhmZ6H0KB0jTu0spe-- --------------ug7St9neskMSGcqkOPGWunfU-- --------------nUSW7kwjMU0YyfRN1V7oOFXB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="OpenPGP_signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="OpenPGP_signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- wsF5BAABCAAjFiEEXb4j05BTZSZ/jMdq/blSvT9zVtYFAmeRW2wFAwAAAAAACgkQ/blSvT9zVtbF Vg//SYeB8wMzQvTy9Pxdo2AxifEmRsZioSXoyIug9cAWcWAbIw2dlc8n1y0np7OKjimufaunzuKP RsWXzrx17KFFysy37KEntH/PGM4ujXhwIMa5kQBHY/MZzpmQZ49Vu0OBkFt5MxeIomsPwEfkO+kJ E0Us1lGaLNaDJN+hvzSMHuzzWqUN17D+EjBeHmUcAxcZR3alyUA9WPqAoKICVqHlwVNV4ChmTx83 BXRZ/2ryadr7rM5KIbmyr6a/w67REUGCFqPLhDJUvLWXKN8A+H+q1EieBbOULxYSALKnGPM0Lc0m QmJozA1BAaCQghPorXVTCy2/sQ5FaIBX7u3Z/cais/ePv01tSL4s8ucj6DgaqnE8190KOdvnMd+N y4jmjJeIa1dZGuqZAV4qrierf5ez2MbTC0EY4H1+bNM7cC7M5MBc8z6mOm4ZllUbDvsP/eQtNeAy O94vXltmp6RggU+ilKepswB/3A6EWeKIYFdHoeZG5DWz3CFU61UoMPsjVL0iyc2qi6c+PiM0ARGs nzxuwlVx4yoXsC4UdyQJQuoQ2tCZGTriIfjxHWmZf/KSY/ic38NRBscf8ESAbDCbrLdkS/XWWDeg 8KNdZi85oYE2C6c0MYHMEWZJj/F79qKRNlOrJd3+i7a2ZZRsFHQKmWwu4QA51p40RyU1s4G+PG7Y iWo= =XERu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------nUSW7kwjMU0YyfRN1V7oOFXB--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jan 2025 20:16:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 22 15:16:02 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36723 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tah8r-0006kf-Uy for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:16:02 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x344.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::344]:44182) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN>) id 1tah8o-0006k3-Vr for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:16:00 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x344.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436345cc17bso1181255e9.0 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 12:15:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737576952; x=1738181752; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=jwpC0z6Vx0dfDD2gmoL/Qf3/36ZL8Tzw9nfKVoXF/kM=; b=h3tl3zZw0p3HehcxpKhAx8ZLQS612aIXDDqq/qQCKFWZmgymyvnXsiwJ2RHUxyNNz/ UMIPOfEFWYlR3t5a9FQqcLiwCPTBp8H3FSC1UBRvbPdoBvo2V1DaP6OxWOYSBVl6Z1M2 39VQTPljGRHu3AhI/317+PmqX6lZjHYtgh/VQDl7gmiLg+UaE/eFQjz44zgqdCOlx4mk 66RoWbB2BEANLzXzFfwt97WnW9/42T5d2U34CewmPwASSqm4YYB62Nzyh4TgBVcHmane v43UYElmxw5/FNXsORM7OAPxCdgr0naEqz6EdPKkPKrb1l0I3B1YIn9QgoSHiE4HPUw4 seWQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737576952; x=1738181752; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=jwpC0z6Vx0dfDD2gmoL/Qf3/36ZL8Tzw9nfKVoXF/kM=; b=rO9fDE0F6ZIQNFxkKGMwbhOdyjigbIZcirYzox6A+GfOJdXGugQ05D+OiV2AMCNGOU BxHzAjTjrIHgmp4h/GZrIEwwaccmnfg82kvSrho87i1R0NYVeljInv3xg853Dyne7JGt M1J0AP6TY0Egyy6/S1692HQh8X0OQ8ex/8b0KcIPYZzkBPs5FBGAEYtT9FBIRAQayQs/ BsB1hy2Q8ZOZSA28FL5cJsjZTpEErRkGg5NWnfjcLxfphLa1D48zpJHs6oV83+uR1/ns TlXt60l11m9ihMDLYbIgN03Ux5b33c5YTvt/C8iI+Cie4DuRm8RY2TJPiIZpsKsT3/Ll S9Ww== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyLPCFRupfiDcMwEW4A446oVnLKpo+Ez1O4mckZJ0mW98QEMKq+ 6yGbVRo00mZ+ML/TVLAZh8gfVHS/hP14/tTR+DX9nycUeQYLbz58Vxq3Du6O X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvsosXF12mfdGn0uPb7sFowPW95vdVF92+nsAHH7kpN3cbQrZUww5jpy+me1dv ZXN21VtOdaPDEyjmPipq4Jsllx/BfzcZdTvSZmQJIgj1K1vrLtiOvfl1oZBrQ3zNwhLWy8zN0A/ zGRowKkdNYr5itvC7PMzSDV+11R0OsVwtm0U6wzbdS3LGFVZdaQA5r1HBW82vapsqs3U+Puevhp YJIpuX+uAdx9xjfXO0pdXIheuYdCnIsO+Y08+8tNfdt2fGhwc46PSOBQtuo0k3a+yRPsRYvezmv pyjImWBOWtAzzQN/8pL8hz3SoIRSIeypgqLsXTNGyLPFkw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEA9Hit4h2jFCBj3v0X5uGPtCjnTG0XD9oV7ostkMju+EGd57UDHVmiXsl1CXjNTlXsqNuUiA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1d19:b0:434:f623:9ff3 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-438913e0303mr242077765e9.15.1737576952270; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 12:15:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from lumine.fritz.box (85-127-114-32.dsl.dynamic.surfer.at. [85.127.114.32]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-438b319fac7sm35787915e9.13.2025.01.22.12.15.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 Jan 2025 12:15:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <07c29b3a1691440a850c11004ba37ab84823c08d.camel@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Consensus Document process =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=93?= deliberation From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 21:15:58 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 Mittwoch, dem 22.01.2025 um 20:44 +0100 schrieb Simon Tournier: > If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by > email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org=C2=A0your reply, either: >=20 > =C2=A0=E2=80=A2 I support; I support. > Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit > an GCD first. Typo: should be a GCD :) Cheers
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jan 2025 19:50:10 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 22 14:50:10 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36666 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tagjo-0005Rx-Sp
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 14:50:10 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x329.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::329]:53440)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tagjl-0005N0-SV
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 14:50:07 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x329.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-43624b2d453so1266625e9.2
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 11:50:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737575400; x=1738180200; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:subject:to:from:from:to:cc
:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=3NHAy6uBC+cchHKxRhSAwG5vKWpTAa3yZ78Lg5NXt1A=;
b=FPWzmE7uvHKUAsE7lT8YXq51rqBs3S0TMRJ1kEUplm7O9onsPZQ9dJFNTHkcjz4piK
Q18JfVxtMZQyjB89nI7V3Pq7ZA8k+9d8GhOfB2uuWP55NQX3qdGOnOii/8dqZVhP+MME
RMxkSTrYIHlDUSRegkohwayFEfpDbkEF8C3DTyYGuVx9L0ZTRaMu75jjjzVoHivX9x+X
MlNfvX8YGR1r76xVMO0wGouRzs1+xreGGvHx821MFIzSpf/hDMgzo1pdEmIOiWh7kQWZ
qe5SoBnaYfZVSL2BhAD82RI8krvN2mvHCY3u3lXHVkfjyWXuQq9K6mU0ivgfaYXx2kjm
t8xQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737575400; x=1738180200;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:subject:to:from
:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=3NHAy6uBC+cchHKxRhSAwG5vKWpTAa3yZ78Lg5NXt1A=;
b=FjSraymHVukqWBYPbPnd6kFc3RyzkQCjmcqA9/C9ihcMsutrHaLs6iM2JD/byh7qas
GkxPzJYXpAAiZb78I4wRDxM7F0ovq0KbJxXdiB7V+qLZfMAnD7TG5b12HrhjBceXXuAq
pcDYA49zz/F+/d0Cul7NZB7mUCcaFz8sE+KDdqH3HOB4HJoGRb9rfcwdZ8oNKTBGpKeU
aOr2s10BjD+z/fPO/2kj0WhPVmProwDuvUxCXx6Zcd9WhnhGBJafEKmt/I5p911E621l
l4lRfXossjrBy4BWLbQ/oe5XE2GSZnEdl0HKfDNjy4Ljqx0Qv+avXW91NMDpML+WiWVs
jNcA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxHHAu2clgNY/82WVwmW6gzNL12ltiq11YfpsK0UO5PbtjtDCoB
JxHzcmJF78Mu/gb1vsB/EAhbxN8wy/CZQ6RDF0zSS6dgdOy+KtCaQiUuNfzH
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctj+Y0Mur7B3fM/2/HRYG7wR7UwbhevV3f+aKTz/0rKDNkyT7t6psoHqQ3I4cV
BWRhhMirsuLTBftWFiMF4kuOq5ohMjWKYB3E6vE5HhkdD0Jc5HT2lNsrMnsyEV8MMLjq0vAY+DQ
nR6+7i8ezOythvnAZXmCJR/2YZkIwgT1VBnwWFd+Lmv2ZrUm9UVa+HhriDUP3dlDxYVXuw95am5
EM5t8HVMcA28JREkFf7SNnziE7WSYYHO9cGWR05llF3dshK6EWEdfnkjlz5SRq/Relm
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGP1Sw1nL5s1AfB6HbqykFb8Nzy9QTwVFNly1T0qg8/Oa3w3FDMNZgDymD+ZxTpr3VsJPag9w==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3495:b0:431:5c3d:1700 with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4389143b450mr188547295e9.21.1737575399439;
Wed, 22 Jan 2025 11:49:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:3885:25df:9e55:39fd])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-438b31a38cbsm37144005e9.16.2025.01.22.11.49.58
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 22 Jan 2025 11:49:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [FWD] Guix Consensus Document process =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=93?=
deliberation
References: <87r04uljlj.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:49:55 +0100
Message-ID: <87msfiljbw.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
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
Repost because =E2=80=9C550 This message scored 18.0 spam points.=E2=80=9D
-------------------- Start of forwarded message --------------------
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: info-guix@HIDDEN, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: [...]
all teams members
+ all people with commit access=20=20
Subject: Guix Consensus Document process =E2=80=93 deliberation
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:44:08 +0100
--=-=-=
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="==-=-="
--==-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,
Here is the Guix Consensus Document (GCD) process which implements how
we will collectively make decision on *significant* changes. Since it
bootstraps the process, it=E2=80=99s important to have a common understandi=
ng of
it.
If you are member of a team (etc/teams.scm), you are asked to send by
email to 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org your reply, either:
=E2=80=A2 I support;
=E2=80=A2 I accept;
=E2=80=A2 I disapprove.
If you have commit access and not yet a member of any team, please
consider to join one. Since we are bootstrapping the process, your
reply matters too. :-)
The Deliberation Period ends on February, 5th everywhere on Earth.
Note that the Discussion Period is now done. Therefore, if you accept
with strong concerns, please provide a summary (5-10 lines) that will be
included in the final document.
If someone disapproves, please explicitly point which major comment you
did that had not been included in this final document.
Attached the GCD file and the template file. Below various milestones if
you need more context.
Thanks for all the comments! I=E2=80=99m personally happy with this outcom=
e. :-)
Cheers,
simon
--
--==-=-=
Content-Type: text/markdown; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=001-gcd-process.md
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: 001-gcd-process.md
title: Guix Consensus Document Process
id: 001
status: submitted
discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus
date: 2025-12-08
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
---
# Summary
This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the
GNU Guix project, later referenced as either Guix or =E2=80=9Cthe project=
=E2=80=9C, for
brevity. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes affecting
the project. It aims to draw the attention of community members on
important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to weigh
in.
# Motivation
Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer review,
and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so does the
stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to keep track of
all of them.
The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
*significant* enough to require attention from the community at large and
if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
A change may be deemed *significant* when it could only be reverted at a
high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to disrupt
user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
- changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
- adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
- changing the channel mechanism;
- changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
deprecation policy, or this very document;
- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, and so
on).
# Detailed Design
## When to Follow This Process
The GCD process applies only to *significant* changes, which include:
- changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
(command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
- big restructuring of packages;
- hard to revert changes;
- significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
- governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
GCD first.
Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require a GCD; examples include:
- adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
- fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change interfaces;
- updating the manual, updating translations;
- changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure in a
user-invisible way.
These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described in
the [=E2=80=9DContributing=E2=80=9C section of the GNU Guix Reference
Manual](https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Contributing.html).
# How the Process Works
## Getting Started
1. Clone
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name` is a
short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
3. Write your GCD following the template structure. The GCD must describe
a concrete idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even if not all
details are known; the GCD must not be a brainstorming session or a
vague idea but a concrete proposal. If it intends to deprecate a
previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*: one
or more people who will support the GCD and participate in discussions
by your side (see below).
The GCD is now in *draft* state and will be *submitted* once it has at
least one sponsor in addition to the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Pe=
riod=E2=80=9D
below.
## Roles
- An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
conclusion.
- A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the GCD
by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments to
help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as timekeepers. As
a sponsor, please make sure that all participants have the time and
space for expressing their comments.
Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommended,=
but not
mandatory, to be a team member.
- A *team member* is the member of a team, as defined in the [Teams
section of the GNU Guix Reference
Manual](https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Teams.html).
Currently, the list of teams and their members is maintained in the
file `etc/teams.scm` in the [GNU Guix
repository](https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/etc/teams.s=
cm)
- A *contributor* is a person who has been participating in Guix
activities, for instance by writing or reviewing code, by supporting
users on fora, or by contributing to translations.
## Communication Channels
- The *draft* is sent by email to `guix-devel@HIDDEN`.
=20
- Once *submitted*, the GCD is announced to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and discus=
sed
using the assigned issue number.
=20=20=20
- The *final* document is published to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and the
deliberating replies are sent to the assigned issue number.
## Timeline
A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
consisting of several *periods*.
```
draft submitted final
+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
| (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days)=
|
+--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +---------------------+
: : : |
: v : |
: cancelled v |
: o-----------o |
+- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
o-----------o |
V
o----------o
| Accepted |
o----------o
```
The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
Anyone can author and propose a GCD as a regular patch and look for
sponsors (see =E2=80=9CRoles=E2=80=9D). The GCD is *submitted* once one or=
more people
have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=
=80=9D; it is
*cancelled* if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
is the *discussion period*.
Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
later (under a new GCD number).
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start of the
discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and announce
the start of the *deliberation period*. If the authors fail to do so, the
deliberation period automatically starts 60 days after the start of the
discussion period based on the latest version provided by the author(s).
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D below.
The *deliberation period* starts when the authors publish a final version
of the GCD at `info-guix@HIDDEN`. Anyone who is a team member is a
deliberating member and is encouraged to contribute to the deliberation.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send one
of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
- =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementati=
on of the
proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementati=
on of the
proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made constructive
comments during the discussion period.
The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members=E2=80=93as of=
the
start of the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D=E2=80=93send a reply, an=
d (2) no one
disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*.
GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean the
proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all the
participants consent to its implementation.
Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it could
mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in the GCD are
accepted by the community.
## Decision Making
Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions that
everyone can live with.
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns are
actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
details, you are encouraged to read
<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
## Merging GCDs
Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a person with commit rights merges the
GCD following these steps:
1. Fill in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the `status`
to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the discussion in the
`discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if previously-accepted
GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the `status` header
accordingly with `deprecated`);
2. Commit everything;
3. Announce the publication of the GCD.
All the GCDs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike
4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the [GNU
Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover
Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html)
or (at your option) any later version.
## GCD Template
The expected structure of GCDs is captured by the template file
`000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown syntax.
## Cost of Reverting
Not applicable. Please note that the GCD process described in this
document can be amended by subsequent GCDs.
## Drawbacks
There is a risk that the additional process may hinder or burden
contributions, potentially causing more harm than good. We should stay
alert that the process is only a way to help contribution, not an end in
itself.
Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices and
notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon, and
solicit opinions from those who remained silent.
## Open Issues
There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
While we want to ensure that technical changes affecting users are
well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become undu=
ly
burdensome. This is a delicate balance which will require care to maintain
moving forward.
--==-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
--
--
--==-=-=
Content-Type: text/markdown
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=000-template.md
Content-Description: 000-template.md
title: <Name Of The Proposal>
id: <the next available number>
status: <draft|submitted|accepted|withdrawn|deprecated>
discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/<number assigned by issue tracker>
authors: <Author Name>
sponsors: <Sponsor Name>
date: <date when the discussion period starts>
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
---
# Summary
A one-paragraph explanation: motivation and proposed solution.
# Motivation
Describe the problem(s) this GCD attempts to address as clearly as possible
and optionally give an example. Explain how the status quo is insufficient or
not ideal.
# Detailed Design
Main part. The sections compares this solution to other options, including
the status quo, and describes the various tradeoffs in this space. Explain
details, corner cases, provide examples. Explain it so that someone familiar
can understand.
It is best to exemplify, including with contrived examples. If the Motivation
section describes something that is hard to do without this proposal, this is
a good place to show how easy that thing is to do with the proposed solution.
## Cost of Reverting
This section explains the impact on users and/or community members of the
proposed change, and estimates the effort it would take to revert it.
For code changes, assess the expected impact on existing code or processes on
the following scale:
0. No incompatibility
1. Incompatible only in extremely rare cases (corner cases)
2. Incompatible in rare cases (only visible to advanced users)
3. Unavoidable incompatibility (affecting most)
Describe the migration path and consider how to follow the Deprecation Policy
of the project.
For non-coding activities such as processes of the project, similarly explain
what impact they will have on workflows.
How will your proposed change evolve over time? What is the cost of changing
or reverting the approach later?
# Drawbacks and Open Issues
At submission time, be upfront about open issues so others in the community
can help.
At the end of the process, this section might be empty. If not, please be
explicit with the known issues and potential directions to address them.
--==-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
--
PS: The very first draft had been sent more than one year ago [1,2].
Then we discussed this topics at Guix Days 2024 [3]. No=C3=A9 resumed
[4] on December (more than 40 days ago) and several updates had been
sent to guix-devel; see v5 [5], v6 [6], v7 [7] etc. v10 [8]. A
consensus had been reached.
The discussion is tracked in:
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
1: Request-For-Comment process: concrete implementation
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Tue, 31 Oct 2023 12:14:42 +0100
id:87h6m7yrfh.fsf@HIDDEN
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-10
https://yhetil.org/guix/87h6m7yrfh.fsf@HIDDEN
2: [bug#66844] [PATCH 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Tue, 31 Oct 2023 12:05:22 +0100
id:cover.1698747252.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/66844
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/cover.1698747252.git.zimon.toutoune@gmail=
.com
https://yhetil.org/guix/cover.1698747252.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN
3: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix/maintenance.git/tree/doc/guix-day=
s-2024/governance.org?id=3D12a5d469852a008c314c5f30d17ce60f5a954325
4: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
No=C3=A9 Lopez via Guix-patches via <guix-patches@HIDDEN>
Sun, 08 Dec 2024 13:29:52 +0100
id:cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN
https://yhetil.org/guix/cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN
5: Request-For-Comment process: concrete implementation (v5)
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Fri, 03 Jan 2025 19:38:01 +0100
id:87ttafn3p2.fsf@HIDDEN
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2025-01
https://yhetil.org/guix/87ttafn3p2.fsf@HIDDEN
6: Re: Request-For-Comment process: concrete implementation (v5)
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN>
Tue, 07 Jan 2025 11:40:11 +0100
id:87zfk229h0.fsf@HIDDEN
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2025-01
https://yhetil.org/guix/87zfk229h0.fsf@HIDDEN
7: Guix Common Document process (v7) (was: Request-For-Comment, RFC)
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Fri, 10 Jan 2025 01:07:47 +0100
id:87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2025-01
https://yhetil.org/guix/87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN
8: Guix Consensus Document process (v10)
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Fri, 17 Jan 2025 02:06:23 +0100
id:87bjw6mepc.fsf@HIDDEN
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2025-01
https://yhetil.org/guix/87bjw6mepc.fsf@HIDDEN
--==-=-=--
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
-------------------- End of forwarded message --------------------
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jan 2025 04:32:47 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 20 23:32:47 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52870 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ta5wU-0008Me-R7
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 23:32:47 -0500
Received: from mail-pj1-x1029.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1029]:57771)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>)
id 1ta1Un-0001qV-JI
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 18:47:54 -0500
Received: by mail-pj1-x1029.google.com with SMTP id
98e67ed59e1d1-2ee9a780de4so6337836a91.3
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:47:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737416867; x=1738021667; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date
:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=ONjMXjtfqeK4G2LuOcc87Dae1tGJ4+aUMtVlRWJa5lI=;
b=PtgRCd6dz8Acd80LI2x6K7p392wwTk7q1iQALrREvoC1yCb5Lg5H2qvmIvJaFHGg+U
oyLIUhqmYvQB7OdPur9agiuQ8lPxBWf8R+5WJSo1rJizBnZrm9zL6IGBVwN/JzJIZ4pb
mWF6VkeKc8arqyxOQKMbLuGVblMdEeVHDlD0kQVIYQMScLZpPOHM6TqCATP33ST+sMZQ
415dTTdYoEdc50CVCGIM+lj8UGCO/DC9cNNP3pd3DYFAwHZ9bUmhk5z4i1eNrFzsoRLV
3+P1ty057db3Oiiv0IEUGUqmBPBoT/1YCpC5PZ88X8mnVzqAc6bfS0aXDbDGHQK+nmM5
nvCA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737416867; x=1738021667;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent: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=ONjMXjtfqeK4G2LuOcc87Dae1tGJ4+aUMtVlRWJa5lI=;
b=amj9BsvMkUxRL5LDTaaz38EVZsqB2omEXPEcuulWvSX7XawN3uWZSHGrRccEXjh+5N
3hQEGwW/O9d70FW4kwHKt+X04wbtADEcU2A1qHTDXp2v4/FmOCLjPAlDip1bsfdiqNVZ
9vTbI2ak9jvPAvKNV6ZrF57lNy6ucuZZbgXmPMHZbHCVRTiRhWXeFLSoiq5qsZpxtccB
ZVBI30RQcQjHloBLQTcg+cQPz8XpLhDPMon4HjTuqZkT0jh7EmIuPIfvie1q6YD5x6YO
CfCbRWE+kKH29h+mmUROS2G/t4CLFSIvY6Y1KtxJIVy5sYsFfU1YsvXRwwVX2003wrDM
QvHA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCXydRMKeM0AHNltPErcvT9nPZcUrD8dxzDC6YZjE8BPPiwwqD9WuDdwkHWeIfkZcGujbB7XXg==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyoGyGwPmoxe5/f67cGvnx03lHOWWs5JGbQ+15j6wiHsfZhp3wi
ijGTKQkoYc6Ya2Xd6pkPKx3Bzu6vDeAbFcEWRqpf4Vwu7bt8u/61
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctrmbj2ElSgZxHWJp905Q3KT47lVeZiDYe8DplRo0m0PtsGMn+t65Ho2wosCYi
69TBsR0hMM7P/yqwbcQNyDEaXwGHiHJC4uh1Hfn6OXk2YkLkmRAZka6GIhokycwsxyd8pjywlMJ
DsfJOvLD+cLPZ9EYfmfcR/65UcjHo4BrgSUKjXbRIN745J9FxKMM9g3vRNzkePbAM+YzJd1u6da
RPgkXvMbWWGU34pZ9XxJX8WTZX+es1cZHQVv9/xVoz9Lqtb6P8bXhtQZNczsIy6g3Y=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG7zayN0HOx/epMC8DKyBZHcDXc7otLgX1tnAFfgcI5SYqQ89G5ztuLbbJa4DT6YENKJLFZhw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3d47:b0:2ee:cdea:ad91 with SMTP id
98e67ed59e1d1-2f782c9cb29mr22464649a91.15.1737416867530;
Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:47:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from terra ([2405:6586:be0:0:c8ff:1707:9b9:af89])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
98e67ed59e1d1-2f72c2bb2cdsm11613666a91.34.2025.01.20.15.47.42
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:47:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87zfjlktyi.fsf@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?=
=?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Mon, 20 Jan 2025 23:21:09 +0100")
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87tt9ymfqx.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87frle6vw3.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87zfjlktyi.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 08:47:32 +0900
Message-ID: <87plkhavzf.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
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, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hello, > > Just one note: >
> Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > >>> The GCD process is a mechanism to determine
whether a proposed change is >>> “significant” enough to require attention
from the com [...]
Content analysis details: (3.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (maxim.cournoyer[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2607:f8b0:4864:20:0:0:0:1029 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 23:32:27 -0500
Cc: GNU Guix maintainers <guix-maintainers@HIDDEN>,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>,
pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, bokr@HIDDEN,
Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>,
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <guix@HIDDEN>,
Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>,
"Artyom V. Poptsov" <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>,
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.0 (++)
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, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hello, > > Just one note: >
> Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > >>> The GCD process is a mechanism to determine
whether a proposed change is >>> “significant” enough to require attention
from the com [...]
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (maxim.cournoyer[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2607:f8b0:4864:20:0:0:0:1029 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
Hi,
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes:
> Hello,
>
> Just one note:
>
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> skribis:
>
>>> The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
>>> =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the comm=
unity at large
>>
>> Why quote "significant" ?
>
> To me, this is to emphasize that what is meant by =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=
=80=9D will be
> clarified below.
OK. That wasn't clear to me. I'd suggest wording that explicitly, for
example:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
[...] a proposed change is "significant" (which meaning is clarified
below)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
or similar.
> (Thanks for all the other comments and suggestions!)
My pleasure!
Happy 2025!
--=20
Thanks,
Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jan 2025 04:32:30 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 20 23:32:30 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52868 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1ta5wD-0008Lv-LM for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 23:32:30 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52572) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1ta1G9-00013V-JN for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 18:32:46 -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 1ta08x-0001iC-Qg; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 17:21:16 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=7lm1lAJP55G7F4+wVYfs2kDsQ2HBsLQ7xd/pVeLUzHA=; b=Ej8ZRAzs2eQ1WkOUO+Jv 7PSmH/pEzBs9VQNWltuHaT01svhdAECTveUozZX9WCDVb/6SEUhmVDHBwHviRTuxT4tLgx4WNYLJo ORYetRED80uKKqJKPGihe4CQSuMxmIQMg8CjzDkQYcYIAPDwv3UwRUp/7tcWBYicrLd2iw4QTxGyI srybS7VHxdJwWEdrmwkh1Scha5v8yoRaRQewzg81q/eqNN/d5E8jptgv9FZzxUZV6Ue/w5KciwaOl sJ/a8HGzH0Tmec36UuTPdkiaMt+SyP1+cxXkcySVu4Dtli7oxazXuA/xYTXydYCFB8n8upwlzS5aR v6XBvasWd/Rsbw==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87frle6vw3.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> (Maxim Cournoyer's message of "Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:50:52 +0900") References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87tt9ymfqx.fsf@HIDDEN> <87frle6vw3.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Primidi 1 =?utf-8?Q?Pluvi=C3=B4se?= an 233 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour de la =?utf-8?Q?Laur=C3=A9ole?= 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, 20 Jan 2025 23:21:09 +0100 Message-ID: <87zfjlktyi.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 23:32:27 -0500 Cc: GNU Guix maintainers <guix-maintainers@HIDDEN>, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, bokr@HIDDEN, Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>, Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <guix@HIDDEN>, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>, "Artyom V. Poptsov" <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: -0.3 (/) Hello, Just one note: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN> skribis: >> The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is >> =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the commu= nity at large > > Why quote "significant" ? To me, this is to emphasize that what is meant by =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2= =80=9D will be clarified below. (Thanks for all the other comments and suggestions!) Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jan 2025 04:49:50 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jan 19 23:49:50 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48634 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tZjjQ-0007rv-E5
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2025 23:49:50 -0500
Received: from mail-pj1-x1030.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1030]:61526)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>)
id 1tZhsf-000148-0G
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2025 21:51:14 -0500
Received: by mail-pj1-x1030.google.com with SMTP id
98e67ed59e1d1-2efe25558ddso5092467a91.2
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 19 Jan 2025 18:51:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737341467; x=1737946267; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date
:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=hyFnCBqTF7hAUleVrieKSt4pjeDorMkUAlcEcdWCHi0=;
b=AyOpJcwJpt5aEdA48d38WtGdTLqi867ZBVvvWQBOtKV9xv3vrwngfM45R/rV/6KddJ
63tdNgBkHVSDQO02+pf5NWJDjtXHVIzhekc9pbr3ROCm7vphX2HTy8qWH9JN+jOH1EkT
ohE/+TzlIvet6cA0aAeY6TsFf5wFj6phf4lSbFabWhwLAen7gte165rKwKqkC2uXXIB/
u/2Usf1exlBsCkY/TruHnMaO37nlgSczhUSAnC2+kf2TrWFAo3P20G544tZdWvPU2XYX
PMpzKD2hR9uVpO21B7b9kWI9B2AUZnshK9fnDu/nwsiMUzqt+huIzMdIajwNeeubCcLf
GObg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737341467; x=1737946267;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent: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=hyFnCBqTF7hAUleVrieKSt4pjeDorMkUAlcEcdWCHi0=;
b=bckjHnh6+EACWJBplr1cRvsXCTd0IZx2wLXFmRbnAJLelw8QNLJiU44MWVrLV9vu7+
7Je+hbJ1OpZJayQRdbIX6Wrd2wykCpuK6bppzcuKD3tXa5rdXrEn80AaJC/jEJPS4VrX
ZkNUJz86D+a/gwhyluKQzeNOc+jm5rfypzRyc9URdXVAFLmQC/0T85CLk0xAWTt4Qwso
QGcYJzvveqHUUZlbGsg2ctvWdQp7oVoHeTZGqC972WOQXBc1Cc/mHgHB6475WYiCVmd3
Z0lqvfBLTH7jYMbqtuEwTTGxLAnOXXRuBd61Rv2bQ4QNC5VRSm3kNnAe28bQDBeDGhsH
8lng==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwSDc4Koh/XdZnlPP77jMkTnjqsW8/1iZ5SJ6TCzYwvrq2VXPwk
OpiFdxWfgr/Xh2W3d4meiuPCQOcr35YsQrJw1ft5//pU/Nc4jfC2
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctRs5YcstfRXzGtdEemq9t3AUhcQpELmU1nBq0Pcr9jVn56yiLfJJHPgoacCC2
NzNIN66i7MRn1aLoidig7rT1fMcix4mpEhCf8p+t2HJE5GqW3hHzjAq5ASVL6PzHoLolH9Pa13V
C7KDiP0Il76Ro7aqHjUQ1UHJ9pRmRtzwKyHt1EK2FBtUnA/E8gPyBPMLpFkZ1dKJU6Td4PI8zWP
NbbD3dpdVS6kDsO/O1pucAbzy/N/8mukGHU3+wdGIQi/BTkHP94Ll2ywxXTu3c3yQU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHB8mVLUXRdzbg8Szik6XNk9s6tGz4ON8QVr+fawdXsPGJTAey8ZyN4K23K2fW9vo39mQhGbA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:2b8e:b0:2f6:f107:faf8 with SMTP id
98e67ed59e1d1-2f782d2e546mr17312833a91.24.1737341466545;
Sun, 19 Jan 2025 18:51:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from terra ([2405:6586:be0:0:c8ff:1707:9b9:af89])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
98e67ed59e1d1-2f72c17fa07sm10573606a91.14.2025.01.19.18.51.01
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Sun, 19 Jan 2025 18:51:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@HIDDEN>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87tt9ymfqx.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Fri, 17
Jan 2025 01:43:50 +0100")
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87tt9ymfqx.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:50:52 +0900
Message-ID: <87frle6vw3.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
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 Simon and others! Thanks for the good work. I've been
struggling
keeping pace with it, ah! I liked it already a year ago, and I like it more
now, thanks to the various refinements brought to it in this thread. Below
are small typos I've spotted and other suggestions.
Content analysis details: (3.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [2607:f8b0:4864:20:0:0:0:1030 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (maxim.cournoyer[at]gmail.com)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 19 Jan 2025 23:49:45 -0500
Cc: GNU Guix maintainers <guix-maintainers@HIDDEN>,
pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, bokr@HIDDEN,
Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>,
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <guix@HIDDEN>,
Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>,
"Artyom V. Poptsov" <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>,
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.0 (++)
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 Simon and others! Thanks for the good work. I've been struggling
keeping pace with it, ah! I liked it already a year ago, and I like it more
now, thanks to the various refinements brought to it in this thread. Below
are small typos I've spotted and other suggestions.
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (maxim.cournoyer[at]gmail.com)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2607:f8b0:4864:20:0:0:0:1030 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
Hi Simon and others!
Thanks for the good work. I've been struggling keeping pace with it, ah!
I liked it already a year ago, and I like it more now, thanks to the
various refinements brought to it in this thread. Below are small typos
I've spotted and other suggestions.
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes:
[...]
> title: Guix Consensus Document Process
> id: 001
> status: submitted
> discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
> authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
> sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus
> date-submitted: 2024-12-12
> date: 2025-01-15
> SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
> ---
>
> # Summary
>
> This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the
> Guix project. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
GNU Guix project, later referenced as either Guix or "the project", for
brevity.
> structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
> affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
the attention
> on important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to
> weigh in.
>
> # Motivation
>
> Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
> review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
> does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
> keep track of all of them.
>
> The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
> =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the commun=
ity at large
Why quote "significant" ?
> and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
> discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
>
> A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only b=
e reverted at a
Ditto.
> high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
> disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
>
> - changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
> - adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
> - changing the channel mechanism;
> - changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
> deprecation policy, or this very document;
> - changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
> lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.).
Punctuaction rule: I seem to recall that you don't need a trailing dot
if there is already one, even inside a preceding closing parens [0].
[0] https://english.stackexchange.com/a/8385
> # Detailed Design
>
> ## When to Follow This Process
>
> The GCD process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, wh=
ich include:
The quotes here, again.
> - changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
> (command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
> - big restructuring of packages;
> - hard to revert changes;
> - significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
> - governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
>
> Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
> GCD first.
>
> Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require a GCD; examples include:
>
> - adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
> - fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
> interfaces;
> - updating the manual, updating translations;
> - changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure
> in a user-invisible way.
>
> These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
> by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
in the ["Contributing" section of the GNU Guix Reference
Manual](https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Contributing.html).
> # How the Process Works
>
> ## Getting Started
>
> 1. Clone
> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
> 2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
> is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
> 3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD mu=
st
I'd use just 'template structure', without 's
> describe a concrete idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even
> if not all details are known; the GCD must not be a brainstorming
> session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal. If it intends to
> deprecate a previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
> 4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
> 5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*:
> one or more people who will support the GCD and participate in
> discussions by your side (see below).
>
> The GCD is now in =E2=80=9Cdraft=E2=80=9D state and will be *submitted* o=
nce it has at least
Maybe use *draft* instead of quotes, for emphasis, if deemed necessary.
> one sponsor in addition to the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=
=E2=80=9D below.
Markdown (or at least most flavors in use of it) supports referring to
sections via URL, IIRC. So I'd use:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
See [Submission Period](#submission-period) below.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Taking care to add the #submission-period custom id if our parser
doesn't do so automatically. [1]
[1] https://www.markdownguide.org/extended-syntax/#heading-ids
>
> ## Roles
>
> - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
> Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
> conclusion.
>
> - A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
> below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
> GCD by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
> to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
> timekeepers. As a sponsor, please make sure that all have the time
all *participants*
> and space for expressing their comments.
>
> Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
> familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommende=
d, but
> not mandatory, to be a team member.
>
> - A *team member* is the member of a team, as defined by the Guix
> project in the manual. Currently, the list of teams and their
as defined in the [Teams section of the GNU Guix Reference Manual](https://=
guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Teams.html).
> members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
> repository.
[GNU Guix repository](https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/etc/t=
eams.scm)
>
> - A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
> translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
> of the Guix community.
>
> ## Channels of Communication
>
> - The *draft* is sent to `guix-devel@HIDDEN`.
>
> - Once *submitted*, the GCD is announced to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and disc=
ussed
> using the assigned issue number.
>
> - The *final* document is published to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and the
> deliberating replies are sent to the assigned issue number.
>
> ## Timeline
>
> A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
> consisting of several *periods*.
>
>
> ```
> draft submitted final
> +--------------------+ +---------------------+ +--------------------=
-+
> | Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period=
|
> | (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 day=
s) |
> +--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +--------------------=
-+
> : : : |
> : v : |
> : canceled v |
s/canceled/cancelled/
> : o-----------o |
> +- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
> o-----------o |
> V
> o----------o
> | Accepted |
> o----------o
> ```
>
> The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
>
> ### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
>
> Anyone can author and propose a GCD as a regular patch and look for
> sponsors (see =E2=80=9CRoles=E2=80=9D). The GCD is *submitted* once one =
or more people
> have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=
=E2=80=9D; it is
> *canceled* if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
s/canceled/cancelled/
> is the *discussion period*.
>
> Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
> later (under a new GCD number).
>
> ### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
>
> Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
> community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
> incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
> share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
> included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
>
> When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
> of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
> announce the start of the *deliberation period*.
>
> If after 60 days, a final version is not yet published, then a grace peri=
od
> of 14 days is granted. Finally the GCD is considered as *stale* and the =
last
> update is picked for the final version.
>
> ### Deliberation Period (14 days)
>
> Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Makin=
g=E2=80=9D
> below.
>
> The *deliberation period* starts when the authors publish a final version=
of
> the GCD at `info-guix@HIDDEN`. Anyone who is a team member is a
> deliberating member and is encouraged to contribute to the deliberation.
>
> Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
> one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
>
> - =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal;
> - =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementa=
tion of the
> proposal;
> - =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementa=
tion of the
> proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made
> constructive comments during the discussion period.
>
> The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members=E2=80=93as =
of
> the start of the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D=E2=80=93send a rep=
ly, and (2) no one
> disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*.
>
> GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
> the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
> the participants consent to its implementation.
>
> Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it
> could mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in
> the GCD are accepted by the community.
>
> ## Decision Making
>
> Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
> consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions
> that everyone can live with.
>
> Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
> are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
> disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
> proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
>
> To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
> details, you are encouraged to read
> <https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
>
> ## Merging GCD
>
> Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a person who has commit permission
> to the GCD repository merges the GCD following these steps:
>
> 1. filling in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the
> `status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
Instead of ing form, I'd just use imperative for these steps, which is
more concise and in line with how we document code already.
s/filling/fill/
> discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
> previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
> `status` header accordingly with `deprecated`);
> 2. committing everything;
s/committing/Commit an push the resulting document/
> 3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
s/announcing/announce/
> All the GCDs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
> Attribution-ShareAlike
> 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
> [GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
> Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
> Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html) or (at your option)
> any later version.
>
> ## GCD Template
>
> The expected structure of GCDs is captured by the template in the file
by the template file
> `000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown syntax.
>
> ## Cost of Reverting
>
> The GCD process described in this document can be amended by subsequent
> GCDs.
This section name (Cost of Reverting) doesn't match with its content?
> ## Drawbacks
>
> There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more=
than
> it would help.
may hinder or burden contributions, potentially causing more harm than
good.
> We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help
> contribution, not an end in itself.
>
> Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
> collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices
s/over-/over/ ?
> and notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon,
> and solicit opinions of those who remained silent.
s/of those/from those/
> ## Open Issues
>
> There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
> While we want to ensure that technical changes that affect users are
s/that affect users/affecting users/
> well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become un=
duly
> burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to
s/careful/delicate/, to avoid repeating 'care' twice.
Assuming my above comments are addressed,
Reviewed-by: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail>
--=20
Thanks,
Maxim
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 23:53:13 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 17 18:53:13 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39329 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYw9I-0006zr-Ve
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 18:53:13 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::336]:44487)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYw9G-0006zb-6C
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 18:53:11 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-43618283d48so18197195e9.1
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 15:53:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737157983; x=1737762783; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=PqQyTGjkeI0hHe50tdJfmhJIBt6GtMy1PIirHIayYCE=;
b=hNky/8MoHU3v6ovuaX3RyuOGFi6AUftAlIVOMVKBPK+QVvuhUv1hM1C4mtg71Xm6iJ
4B16HTNas3w9LwkaqX6AkCLLDV0XgnUFedzIFDdvviFERIVKT9leAJwocV3LwdIT2m2J
b7Q7lVex3JYcmmPb5L4fafBBL97brbtTes/Rz8s0qfiYCj6xcruBtZKJx2z9Bpn51mFF
ITlP4HBsfWW0GIw080QWpQYhkk9qQsqqdnB8htebZxYe4kY1pnOckXH+e55Elt0o7sw5
vQYmE2BpPB2IHWU3iS7EQtmato/QkE1Q7RxrKE0BdmYmDt58AaXgq1vBzMZWilRvIMc3
tjGQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737157983; x=1737762783;
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=PqQyTGjkeI0hHe50tdJfmhJIBt6GtMy1PIirHIayYCE=;
b=HuW/GigyPWna83dkohjvynimObb1npryGkZM2hra08+N6XneF+qbKb7sXTsqe19540
96U0vDbxMTBHSEMprnLbMhXdXZ9UilgFAhRhS0DNRw9Uwz0IwgeN5B/czMXkO5XYguBD
QaXXZtt+kd/fe6DXe43Ha0mM2piIs2qgM7GZFKqYYpKImuuUoYuqGPIKQf2vUvj3H58/
Xsv/V0CVtrK4Tne1d3IFvUELzT5UrTe0tRNT25i+IFIvZe4GRkTskxdqRFi2aHL7QeC+
fNPUBV0qtaJJIak0CMLH6lQvFZj62a1siF3iBLtZjXhwNiSOP8oFBQ4DwtNczYxAX4ik
i4Zw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCWOaw7z5OLOjq2yZU+/osf/A9BxWseRIJJ0e/HnEVjerRsUg6cwvycMRxAAzP3LQVkyDlnixw==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx42cP8rz45DrNlqLcCgr0qEbqwhgjGAj6E88NAx6W0ftBMiDTQ
ejylGIcFKP8cPsNYv+gVGRZvEELwavc3t/Gert6Rbnl6l1rlXy8N
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvjTqLoqqUBlscFOkHF/DnWHSmXPJB0dMjcPw2BEKZvs2Gelg1uHIStDOAg4XL
eF3jmO0lK5NZ9KmprrOk+/AUZLAtBc4pzIK9vvjaLiYSy2HiosDogQZX9ZdruvZQLN3aa8Esph9
RatbeTZuuHMmHTMQI2dOp5yyUL95IkugaDXjNL7MBHteLyqKkEyQRF2W5117cVsmKFtbTo3f71h
apPl1ch8FoHm5BBmicZ3gyseFXWl3+YAPTYdqcuAdwYkkJ9abg7UiwYfSmmuI9FKG/h/9ONr0wH
WIcCbfqtW0jTvPas2TROYHgpM1ltinyyobKk1/o6EjO8C5lpfNm7EA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGpsyfrQq5jHVfUO3MpE6g4rrtEPOWFWztpwzga3GgvhRtYFgL4SY21XfYb0gM+oyCf9rWkmQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:c0e:b0:431:5044:e388 with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4389142968emr46280665e9.22.1737157983137;
Fri, 17 Jan 2025 15:53:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (2a01cb0411b18600d6752fc800102cc4.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr.
[2a01:cb04:11b1:8600:d675:2fc8:10:2cc4])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
ffacd0b85a97d-38bf32154b5sm3719797f8f.16.2025.01.17.15.53.01
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Fri, 17 Jan 2025 15:53:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: reza <reza@HIDDEN>, "74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org"
<74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, "ludo@HIDDEN" <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
In-Reply-To: <010201947430358c-fd89834b-07b3-4535-9ce5-b7d1a4f8f08b-000000@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
<87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<825F8319-4F41-4F4C-81B3-2C84A73A13CF@HIDDEN>
<01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN>
<87y0zjh8te.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ed1163j5.fsf@HIDDEN>
<010201947430358c-fd89834b-07b3-4535-9ce5-b7d1a4f8f08b-000000@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 16:39:50 +0100
Message-ID: <87sephmou1.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
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 Reza, On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 at 12:15, reza via Guix-patches
via wrote: > I don't see this mention in the document?
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_06_12 Date: is 6 to 12 hours before Received: date
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:336 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@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 Reza,
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 at 12:15, reza via Guix-patches via <guix-patches@HIDDEN=
rg> wrote:
> I don't see this mention in the document?
Well, I think it=E2=80=99s covered with the term =E2=80=9Csequence number=
=E2=80=9D and with the
information provided by the 000-template.md.
id: <the next available number>
> Also
> will this mean we only can do 999 RFC's?
Well, this document will be amended a couple of times before we are
close to have 999 GCDs, I guess. :-) Therefore, we will refine depending
on how it goes.
Moreover, considering the changes that would have required such process
from the 10+ past years, I think we have some time for preparing the
case of 999 before we reach it. :-)
Cheers,
simon
PS: Fun: =E2=80=9Csequence number=E2=80=9D could be a Fibonacci sequence nu=
mber=E2=80=A6 Even,
it could be let to the author as an exercise to determine which
=E2=80=9Csequence=E2=80=9D the project is following. ;-)
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 12:15:15 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 17 07:15:15 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36243 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYlFq-0006cJ-N1 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 07:15:14 -0500 Received: from a2-249.smtp-out.eu-west-1.amazonses.com ([54.240.2.249]:52965) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <010201947430358c-fd89834b-07b3-4535-9ce5-b7d1a4f8f08b-000000@HIDDEN>) id 1tYlFn-0006Yb-In for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 07:15:12 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=tsl3ypnlx3orlf3fv2rkjjc5b3u22mve; d=housseini.me; t=1737116104; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To:References:Message-Id; bh=xth+3hJ/g00mZCsonLn8GdEqYqO/SJLIE2JigUguXQQ=; b=PrF+ENe7airvmfzVGBI79gb7pqmkfFK1sY3wKIbr8ixHyKhO/A8Q62Y6kSx+rcoG 9hTpQo4cYBFBivCnsAF/dcll4Xh+uMHpDyM0V7JA8CeqreozyDekyhfcLJBwDrF8HaY wRZRET82lYUDbNNC02aNnySVbN7wFbn7t9l+Vf/Q= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=uku4taia5b5tsbglxyj6zym32efj7xqv; d=amazonses.com; t=1737116104; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To:References:Message-Id:Feedback-ID; bh=xth+3hJ/g00mZCsonLn8GdEqYqO/SJLIE2JigUguXQQ=; b=Gk3fVqRVGNRdO9ADr/ERlktpptIuBo09S7GkWbTq0rr0l5lGGmxFQ8W2DhCTPYsp LGekDD+GhqWBH2vmEWS09jKuv76vPKTLKjACrdWZroQ/roWZyuu7zGyS2ahWA2t2d1F rjeFhFypeNqV//iEug7Vxr2LfoOlQPfis2oR4700= Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process. From: =?UTF-8?Q?reza?= <reza@HIDDEN> To: =?UTF-8?Q?Simon_Tournier?= <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, =?UTF-8?Q?74736=40debbugs=2Egnu=2Eorg?= <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, =?UTF-8?Q?ludo=40gnu=2Eorg?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 12:15:04 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <87y0zjh8te.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <825F8319-4F41-4F4C-81B3-2C84A73A13CF@HIDDEN> <01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN> <87y0zjh8te.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ed1163j5.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Mailer: Amazon WorkMail Thread-Index: AQHbSWzOtYJZbPAyTQe9/jHYS+WLlQUnqnGBBcdyHAsGCp7ZCwZhVK5LB9soYfI= Thread-Topic: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process. X-Wm-Sent-Timestamp: 1737116103 Message-ID: <010201947430358c-fd89834b-07b3-4535-9ce5-b7d1a4f8f08b-000000@HIDDEN> Feedback-ID: ::1.eu-west-1.b24dn6frgCi6dh20skzbuMRr7UL8M6Soir/3ogtEjHQ=:AmazonSES X-SES-Outgoing: 2025.01.17-54.240.2.249 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9_Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN>, =?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9=0D=0A?= =?UTF-8?Q?_Lopez?= <noelopez@HIDDEN>, =?UTF-8?Q?Christopher_Baines?= <mail@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 > I think there is one: the first one is 001 and then they will be > incremented. For instance, assuming v6, it would be: RFC 001, or RFC > 001-rfc-process. Thanks for clarification, I don't see this mention in the document? Also will this mean we only can do 999 RFC's? Best, Reza
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 10:15:49 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 17 05:15:49 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36092 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYjOG-0000mj-0H
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 05:15:49 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37636)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tYjO8-0000mN-NB
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 05:15:45 -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 1tYjO2-0002G4-78; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 05:15:34 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=BQGGZoPrhxtwt5GnLAAomiIA1WKTeKxNXBviYq5mPM8=; b=b7SneurnF5LfJ49269KA
q8mTlmgr+Fp/9dgk2dU+TwLc2Ci4qAitxhwDOmOLaoSll9ouqO6pIt6TXatt3kvpjNMLgYy3gyoS2
tqZheSubqNVukGtl7rECiqPAekATys+kIsAKubEcDVELxDXKarLiQjK5sL/c7LK5KlI9a0rRLNo6q
IOiWWXuceEdV5Q2HCEy4Ypt6C3/G6ci7b6hsVN0VCU4w2aEWbfvPXX2QJ8T3Ze/ScRDL4MSXB7ZH7
sftu1pzCNk1rG0XGbhOJ39bTWQfVKYR1sY6njIjXQN7HMCcQL0zFZFHKtJO3wjkvofFqhI6QA9sqp
UV2ZwEq1cjRSvw==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87h65ymfbl.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Fri, 17
Jan 2025 01:53:02 +0100")
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87h65ymfbl.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 11:15:30 +0100
Message-ID: <87plklwxtp.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
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 Simon,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> skribis:
> I sent v9 (Message-ID: 8734hiskwm.fsf@HIDDEN) but that has not
> reached the list, hum?! And Hartmut sent a diff as v9, hence v10. :-)
Thanks for sending v10, late at night!
It=E2=80=99s of course not the only metric but there=E2=80=99s a bit of pos=
sibly
worrying inflation between v8 and v10:
001-gcd-process-v10.md | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------=
-----
1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
> + - A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
> + translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
> + of the Guix community.
I would drop the last part, which makes it to fuzzy IMO:
- A *contributor* is a person who has been participating in Guix
activities, for instance by writing or reviewing code, by supporting
users on fora, or by contributing to translations.
> +## Channels of Communication
Rather =E2=80=9CCommunication Channels=E2=80=9D.
> + - The *draft* is sent to `guix-devel@HIDDEN`.
s/sent/sent by email/
> +If after 60 days, a final version is not yet published, then a grace per=
iod
> +of 14 days is granted. Finally the GCD is considered as *stale* and the=
last
> +update is picked for the final version.
This is like saying =E2=80=9Cbetween 30 and 74 days=E2=80=9D in practice.
I would rather stick to the 60-day hard limit and clarify what happens
if author(s) fail to act during that time (starting with the paragraph
just above):
When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version
and announce the start of the *deliberation period*. If the authors
fail to do so, the deliberation period automatically starts 60 days
after the start of the discussion period based on the latest version
provided by the author(s).
> -## Merging Final GCDs
> +## Merging GCD
=E2=80=9CMerging GCDs=E2=80=9D
> -Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a committer merges the final GCD
> -following these steps:
> +Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a person who has commit permission
=E2=80=9Ca person with commit rights=E2=80=9D
I think it=E2=80=99s a good document at this point!
Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 09:37:25 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 17 04:37:24 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36036 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYin6-0007GS-HC for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 04:37:24 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35654) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tYin3-0007GB-U4 for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 04:37:22 -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 1tYims-0005Pf-EG; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 04:37:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=XBYv6wA3thRT740zI8rNtHro18PlD/oZY01cZW3GXsI=; b=g/Kefe+ZmucHgQgCOM+h 6oNhk/ykVrqqD/x40Atm8soYE87hoJp1O9Loy0WqLuwhjUPemtnvxc21addiT2w1pKdlzlx52sG1e 6wFFtwyS3+aup6+2liLr4YPW+jbS/xeYH/wSUiE9YazrTOVztuhyEI1xJb0OyGjKAUte3dAYHq/QK 9AahTd1mCI6Cngo3UOAQGVYkdvTyabBCFz1HvFUmFuSf3zR31ef7VTubBbjjfGLJmKF5Dof9vAvyx 1eOi1mw/t2klilIe2S+t7VgAA/aeoWgUZFaPb7QPrKiSQGeP6q2DGlLmfs9Ty+03RxkNjBENmNNSC txJW3jncpvqAoA==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87zfjqr62l.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:01:38 +0100") References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN> <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> <874j1y3fkr.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87zfjqr62l.fsf@HIDDEN> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Octidi 28 =?utf-8?Q?Niv=C3=B4se?= an 233 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour du Zinc 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, 17 Jan 2025 10:37:01 +0100 Message-ID: <87ikqdye6a.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@HIDDEN>, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN, efraim@HIDDEN, rekado@HIDDEN, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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 (---) Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> skribis: >> Perhaps the =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D section could stress that,= with a >> paragraph above =E2=80=9CTo learn =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D along these lines: >> >> Consensus building requires that participants share a common goal, >> trust each other to act in good faith, listen to one another=E2=80=99s >> concerns to take them into account, and are committed to donating >> enough of their time to achieve it. > > To me, this paragraph would be redundant with this other paragraph: > > Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these con= cerns > are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating = member > disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding altern= atives, > proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the stat= us quo. > > >> A deliberating member who =E2=80=9Cinsists on disapproving=E2=80=9D, wit= hout proposing >> alternative paths, wouldn=E2=80=99t meet these requirements. > > Yes and I think that already included in the paragraph above, no? Yes, looks like it. Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 05:19:26 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 17 00:19:26 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35685 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYelR-00031m-8g
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:19:26 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::331]:46463)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYaT8-0006Tx-RT
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:44:16 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-436637e8c8dso14494575e9.1
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737074649; x=1737679449; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=aF5h+kzENJSPOYgq4nAjrebaoWioW5lvLEeDsV49HnM=;
b=HAMPwnrGIFcz/6VLQhdCFq6Tsb8ezE4MJMzFR5hlThkeiACbSHcwvrSf0SYKXC7fdR
1TSSGUDTW4rSKZVy8aTDuQnArIWFHlkf7qOlN9ozFHApjoy6y+MY2cf45cSrJFdRnNnp
/Rikum7rknbJac2RH/isJIaQ9S7pVZqg7u1NVAx+Bo6q5Tf9fIRsEnLgXLaVwFzlJXpD
+DPzoNoysvcuRMeVbjBlZUnjUvuwXD+Fh1EDJ2OpEEy0r3ti9uwHAGJdNKaHr0UwUkKk
WX3D97ZFcaCisfyk5myv+beYGQUqTtNxWJp6rbgYy8Znc0tFw/tj/y1LGBLGUQgpBCYs
xKwg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737074649; x=1737679449;
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=aF5h+kzENJSPOYgq4nAjrebaoWioW5lvLEeDsV49HnM=;
b=FO+hYmufngJZHkTT8MP+hGeE4tCEUjMxaHMV5E2uw/0XHGgTZLVr8cSi0v8db3j/0Z
qAXBG6edHCuErUwkhYDSIKPiACY5eXAE7ocCrvUy5zCxXaXEwAQUX2s0x0GYhXKbt5gT
r3KNrEmzLeEA0feIZXQNn81MpqQGy5jYcUU4XcRwQ2e3Cl/0FqEE5PyMptFP7b7fe09B
DvQqRuSdh/E3OcNduFuEj4Vt50EZSHl/I8oPUZjE5OYx9kjOwevD1kXE8GQ4Klb9Gh6T
I4YcjfCTN9ajuXP+RE+eX+mhVbs3K8GYJXGaUUYvLug4A+BmPMxwgJwElupIQB8ESdTG
h9tg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw7p+mUT5YCvVjI3vlWa/qPmRFKHoGFEh9a1mwUsZW4uKGmrakM
Iz7oezbmYHRxelzlIgTcsPTJY9u64ixDwAKxZL12Ld4DLJLU26Io
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuhRgd3zCXtuvYTMFoBEahylNRrNKurDo5RNHqmqJYNwVJQ+B9yyOaKLy3bJLM
CQ4Syr+KXkt7QQIHlmb19CvxeL6xOX72M4VUmdXGvpSZJYN9JmXVmW/9E9TEvrAzmkP5EPxU3nU
PUrPSYhqwmDQysEfSoABk9N1LHDTiki9IQj5UuMBKpV/w89DBADBTQ0td5Hli1yPrdJlU1Zo0nb
duDurJbUYlnPTWd1vVciU0zq5nR8dvaUzfZZ2AftPNTFnObib053Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFogqktHt1ZE8i5tma5Oy3Ph3WnKevLMvnMCc49LgkphLKx0uGMTso/dZZyPP4we2tn8tfI9g==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:871a:b0:436:e751:e445 with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-438913c15b0mr6098015e9.5.1737074648590;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:cadd:a17:8766:e21f])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-4389041f61bsm14722835e9.17.2025.01.16.16.44.05
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v10] Add Guix Consensus Document process
In-Reply-To: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 01:43:50 +0100
Message-ID: <87tt9ymfqx.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Spam-Score: 4.0 (++++)
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, I sent v9 (Message-ID: 8734hiskwm.fsf@HIDDEN) but that
has not reached the list, hum?! And Hartmut sent a diff as v9, hence v10.
:-) Changes compared to v8:
Content analysis details: (4.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:331 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
1.0 FREEMAIL_REPLY From and body contain different freemails
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:19:21 -0500
Cc: GNU Guix maintainers <guix-maintainers@HIDDEN>,
pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, bokr@HIDDEN,
Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>,
Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>,
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <guix@HIDDEN>,
"Artyom V. Poptsov" <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>,
Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.0 (++)
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, I sent v9 (Message-ID: 8734hiskwm.fsf@HIDDEN) but that
has not reached the list, hum?! And Hartmut sent a diff as v9, hence v10.
:-) Changes compared to v8:
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:331 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
I sent v9 (Message-ID: 8734hiskwm.fsf@HIDDEN) but that has not
reached the list, hum?! And Hartmut sent a diff as v9, hence v10. :-)
Changes compared to v8:
=E2=80=A2 Changed some level for the subtitles. And added =E2=80=9CGettin=
g Started=E2=80=9D.
=20
=E2=80=A2 Removed trailing dot after repository URL.
=E2=80=A2 Reworded =E2=80=99prospective=E2=80=99.
=E2=80=A2 Removed redundant information about =E2=80=9Csubmitted=E2=80=9D =
and pointed to the
dedicated section. Clarified using the term =E2=80=9Cdraft=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=A2 Replaced the term RFC by GCD.
=E2=80=A2 Added a sentence about the role of =E2=80=9CSponsor=E2=80=9D. A=
nd added a
=E2=80=9CContributor=E2=80=9D role. The idea is to rely on that term fo=
r clarifying
=E2=80=9Cauthor=E2=80=9D and who can discuss. But then, the term does n=
ot appear=E2=80=A6
=E2=80=A2 Add section =E2=80=9CChannel of Communication=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=A2 Revamped the artist view of the timeline.
=E2=80=A2 Minor tweaks under =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=A2 Minor tweaks under =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D. Added a=
paragraph to deal
with the case where =E2=80=9CAuthor=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CSponsor=E2=80=
=9D vanish.
=E2=80=A2 Minor tweaks under =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D: moved =
sentence; removed
redundant information.
=E2=80=A2 Minor tweaks under =E2=80=9CMerging GCD=E2=80=9D.
WDYT?
Cheers,
simon
--
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=v8-v10.diff
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: diff
diff -u /tmp/001-gcd-process-v8.md /tmp/001-gcd-process-v10.md
--- /tmp/001-gcd-process-v8.md 2025-01-17 01:21:27.574454166 +0100
+++ /tmp/001-gcd-process-v10.md 2025-01-17 01:36:03.524561874 +0100
@@ -70,37 +70,39 @@
These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
-## How the Process Works
+# How the Process Works
+
+## Getting Started
1. Clone
- https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git .
+ https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
-3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD mus=
t not
- be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
- implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
+3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD must
+ describe a concrete idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even
+ if not all details are known; the GCD must not be a brainstorming
+ session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal. If it intends to
deprecate a previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*:
one or more people who will support the GCD and participate in
discussions by your side (see below).
-The GCD is *submitted* once it has at least one sponsor in addition to
-the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D below.
-
-Submitted GCD is announced at `info-guix@HIDDEN`.
+The GCD is now in =E2=80=9Cdraft=E2=80=9D state and will be *submitted* on=
ce it has at least
+one sponsor in addition to the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=
=E2=80=9D below.
## Roles
- - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the RFC.
+ - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
conclusion.
- A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
- RFC by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
+ GCD by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
- timekeepers.
+ timekeepers. As a sponsor, please make sure that all have the time
+ and space for expressing their comments.
Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommended=
, but
@@ -111,6 +113,20 @@
members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
repository.
+ - A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
+ translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
+ of the Guix community.
+
+## Channels of Communication
+
+ - The *draft* is sent to `guix-devel@HIDDEN`.
+
+ - Once *submitted*, the GCD is announced to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and discu=
ssed
+ using the assigned issue number.
+
+ - The *final* document is published to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and the
+ deliberating replies are sent to the assigned issue number.
+
## Timeline
A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
@@ -118,49 +134,60 @@
```
- +-----------+
- +- - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------------+
- : +-----------+ |
- : ^ |
- : : |
-+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
-| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
-| (up to 7 days) |-->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days)=
|
-+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
- |
- |
+ draft submitted final
++--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
+| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
+| (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days=
) |
++--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +---------------------+
+ : : : |
+ : v : |
+ : canceled v |
+ : o-----------o |
+ +- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
+ o-----------o |
V
- +----------+
- | Accepted |
- +----------+
+ o----------o
+ | Accepted |
+ o----------o
```
The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
-Anyone can author and submit a GCD as a regular patch and look for
-sponsors (see below). The GCD is *submitted* once one or more people
+Anyone can author and propose a GCD as a regular patch and look for
+sponsors (see =E2=80=9CRoles=E2=80=9D). The GCD is *submitted* once one o=
r more people
have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=
=80=9D; it is
-canceled if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
+*canceled* if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
is the *discussion period*.
Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
-later, possibly under a new GCD number.
+later (under a new GCD number).
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
-Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed; authors are encouraged to
-publish updated versions incorporating feedback during the discussion.
+Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
+community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
+incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
+share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
+included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
announce the start of the *deliberation period*.
+If after 60 days, a final version is not yet published, then a grace period
+of 14 days is granted. Finally the GCD is considered as *stale* and the l=
ast
+update is picked for the final version.
+
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
-All team members can participate in deliberation and are encouraged to
-do so.
+Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
+below.
+
+The *deliberation period* starts when the authors publish a final version =
of
+the GCD at `info-guix@HIDDEN`. Anyone who is a team member is a
+deliberating member and is encouraged to contribute to the deliberation.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
@@ -172,16 +199,9 @@
proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made
constructive comments during the discussion period.
-The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
-reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
-*withdrawn*.
-
-Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
-below.
-
-Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
-to contribute to the deliberation. Team members are defined by the
-file etc/teams.scm (see =E2=80=9CTeams=E2=80=9D in the manual).
+The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members=E2=80=93as of
+the start of the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D=E2=80=93send a repl=
y, and (2) no one
+disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*.
GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
@@ -206,16 +226,16 @@
details, you are encouraged to read
<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
-## Merging Final GCDs
+## Merging GCD
-Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a committer merges the final GCD
-following these steps:
+Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a person who has commit permission
+to the GCD repository merges the GCD following these steps:
1. filling in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the
`status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
- `status` header accordingly);
+ `status` header accordingly with `deprecated`);
2. committing everything;
3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
Diff finished. Fri Jan 17 01:36:38 2025
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
--
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/markdown; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=001-gcd-process-v10.md
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: 001-gcd-process-v10.md
title: Guix Consensus Document Process
id: 001
status: submitted
discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus
date-submitted: 2024-12-12
date: 2025-01-15
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
---
# Summary
This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the
Guix project. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
on important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to
weigh in.
# Motivation
Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
keep track of all of them.
The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
=E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the communit=
y at large
and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only be =
reverted at a
high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
- changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
- adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
- changing the channel mechanism;
- changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
deprecation policy, or this very document;
- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.).
# Detailed Design
## When to Follow This Process
The GCD process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, whic=
h include:
- changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
(command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
- big restructuring of packages;
- hard to revert changes;
- significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
- governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
GCD first.
Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require a GCD; examples include:
- adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
- fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
interfaces;
- updating the manual, updating translations;
- changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure
in a user-invisible way.
These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
# How the Process Works
## Getting Started
1. Clone
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD must=
=20
describe a concrete idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even=20
if not all details are known; the GCD must not be a brainstorming
session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal. If it intends to
deprecate a previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*:
one or more people who will support the GCD and participate in
discussions by your side (see below).
The GCD is now in =E2=80=9Cdraft=E2=80=9D state and will be *submitted* onc=
e it has at least
one sponsor in addition to the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=
=E2=80=9D below.
## Roles
- An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
conclusion.
- A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
GCD by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
timekeepers. As a sponsor, please make sure that all have the time
and space for expressing their comments.
Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommended,=
but
not mandatory, to be a team member.
- A *team member* is the member of a team, as defined by the Guix
project in the manual. Currently, the list of teams and their
members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
repository.
- A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
of the Guix community.
## Channels of Communication
- The *draft* is sent to `guix-devel@HIDDEN`.
=20
- Once *submitted*, the GCD is announced to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and discus=
sed
using the assigned issue number.
=20=20=20
- The *final* document is published to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and the
deliberating replies are sent to the assigned issue number.
## Timeline
A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
consisting of several *periods*.
```
draft submitted final
+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
| (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days)=
|
+--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +---------------------+
: : : |
: v : |
: canceled v |
: o-----------o |
+- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
o-----------o |
V
o----------o
| Accepted |
o----------o
```
The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
Anyone can author and propose a GCD as a regular patch and look for
sponsors (see =E2=80=9CRoles=E2=80=9D). The GCD is *submitted* once one or=
more people
have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=
=80=9D; it is
*canceled* if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
is the *discussion period*.
Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
later (under a new GCD number).
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
announce the start of the *deliberation period*.
If after 60 days, a final version is not yet published, then a grace period
of 14 days is granted. Finally the GCD is considered as *stale* and the la=
st=20
update is picked for the final version.
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
below.
The *deliberation period* starts when the authors publish a final version of
the GCD at `info-guix@HIDDEN`. Anyone who is a team member is a
deliberating member and is encouraged to contribute to the deliberation.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
- =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementati=
on of the
proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementati=
on of the
proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made
constructive comments during the discussion period.
The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members=E2=80=93as of=
=20
the start of the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D=E2=80=93send a reply=
, and (2) no one=20
disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*.
GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
the participants consent to its implementation.
Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it
could mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in
the GCD are accepted by the community.
## Decision Making
Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions
that everyone can live with.
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
details, you are encouraged to read
<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
## Merging GCD
Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a person who has commit permission=20
to the GCD repository merges the GCD following these steps:
1. filling in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the
`status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
`status` header accordingly with `deprecated`);
2. committing everything;
3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
All the GCDs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike
4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
[GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html) or (at your option)
any later version.
## GCD Template
The expected structure of GCDs is captured by the template in the file
`000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown syntax.
## Cost of Reverting
The GCD process described in this document can be amended by subsequent
GCDs.
## Drawbacks
There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more t=
han
it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help
contribution, not an end in itself.
Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices
and notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon,
and solicit opinions of those who remained silent.
## Open Issues
There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
While we want to ensure that technical changes that affect users are
well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become undu=
ly
burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to
maintain moving forward.
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 05:19:23 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 17 00:19:23 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35679 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYelO-00031R-DD
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:19:23 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::334]:60860)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYUCB-0001dp-AE
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 13:02:20 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4361f664af5so13096685e9.1
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737050533; x=1737655333; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=9FurNx4sgBRMbcTBnSit2bdVQYtod2BLxYciuHMvN5w=;
b=B9kP+d4M6dFnzk/dvFo2y6gZ89awrpEyg2lyxfSgO5WV/36W1u1+CM3pCg+9jgKShH
6cxBC/wgdPExiBzF5YxhoPcbN+2CRGxiTUYo3Pfr5CxVf0gcSL1oLnukymD79RkV1M/6
6fe2kB9GThLFWM4bSkXK38ukaMkowHNJ8y/yEziAoXT9I7+bfT6CFDZT09wlnw+aqbyv
S80UyCoyvH192d/Qihs5k/AqLbiKY7jii4/sizLdmI703sB2HKwmaASlPW2YxhmzOIAl
tOcYKS7tOsP+JxO4wUZtht4Kqgp49g0dSGS8F86/dWe0z1gZsczHe/fsUgK00eE7gw8b
YYhw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737050533; x=1737655333;
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=9FurNx4sgBRMbcTBnSit2bdVQYtod2BLxYciuHMvN5w=;
b=xQQZFGb5IOKMhPKEUMra2hNdlF3FO91Y0e1KNXmPP9n1YlTaP2+RytYMUxUhV8Y6zl
vIVNlj2vBFIkccR6gyugxaPMHiOj1M8jUI3+KZoJCpUr6ERQo6omJ1QHY2XZdhbo31cL
qtKYkxhlQQ9oJx6+kWkzKohDEncS9ufo6+BO1V3ec95gX8QoyYpWcyRuofcTjAgMmkbk
lJ/EJD41PXICF+jKqbxHV6+jrdggp84c7hc+tBKHM7T8etSoIUe15P7qIU6owjdwFSrD
16Qi/xAeiD5a+MmLKs8pb3tUPZqSsudAh/y5cBrC9+0mXrgUUMQKsAjOrXUAQQZ7LYuI
/PeA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwPuPEF3uwbaQ99zRKSuoKEssQqRJEn0SVrSLNwyy5OdBQhzR/G
AXvBFF6clA5yEntXVZagfXgFKWaJkxzm5IgMH/6wFFThqU9Zsf4g
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnct5ZLqphgA88Ww+iN5zf4tmTxw3uaIiLGfGD5eougOsvrlymqtXTxV31NO0s3Q
RQolZKweSFjX2EsB2oDbgl2ghgtqIv7khE80RAToFjFZ8eMqKUu3tv9774uNJapECoE2cTxEHZj
Cc4vp19YGa+aXC9WA5fAU3+zG9Nl6d9ACuTRTtIPemQaI/T2gSM00XKGN1A1oRECmheGC2lbLCJ
cvh0KdrjMlK/iX+zoUoJ8AlCxWnTAH+Ag5Af6FoBUMlIGcmSMRnOzepZ4nIc//atc41GS0pgHuj
GhPUCXcOinvYknVoz75SIROU60aYCTxpQ3/on1bxYw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF3kGzC0cPdil5vg5I2sjMvSotrMI71gTA5AC4ooPLvRLEN+b4qLTzKfO+zVcdFeGx5MPcZoQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1561:b0:38a:9f47:557b with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a9f47568cmr21158930f8f.40.1737050532609;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-41.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr.
[194.254.61.41]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-437c7499884sm68489005e9.5.2025.01.16.10.02.10
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#74736] [PATCH v9] Add Guix Consensus Document process
In-Reply-To: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 18:55:53 +0100
Message-ID: <8734hiskwm.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
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, Please find attach the v9;
I hope it addresses the comments.
Attached the diff and the document. The minor changes are:
Content analysis details: (3.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:334 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:19:21 -0500
Cc: GNU Guix maintainers <guix-maintainers@HIDDEN>,
pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, bokr@HIDDEN,
Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>,
Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>,
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>,
Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <guix@HIDDEN>,
"Artyom V. Poptsov" <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>,
Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.0 (++)
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, Please find attach the v9; I hope it addresses the comments.
Attached the diff and the document. The minor changes are:
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:334 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
Please find attach the v9; I hope it addresses the comments.
Attached the diff and the document. The minor changes are:
=E2=80=A2 Point alone =E2=80=9C1. Clone =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D
=E2=80=A2 Replace remaining RFC with GCD.
=E2=80=A2 Add a sentence about =E2=80=9CSponsor=E2=80=9D role.
=E2=80=A2 Add the role of =E2=80=9CContributor=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=A2 Tweak the artist view of the Timeline
=E2=80=A2 Explicit mention that everyone can participate to the =E2=80=9CD=
iscussion
Period=E2=80=9D. And mention that the main concerns and/or opposition a=
re
collected to the final document.
=E2=80=A2 Move upfront the aim of =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D. =
Remove a redundant
sentence.
=E2=80=A2 Explicit mention the state =E2=80=98deprecated=E2=80=99.
WDYT?
Cheers,
simon
--
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=v8-v9.diff
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: diff
diff -u /tmp/001-gcd-process-v8.md /tmp/001-gcd-process-v9.md
--- /tmp/001-gcd-process-v8.md 2025-01-16 16:51:08.758030546 +0100
+++ /tmp/001-gcd-process-v9.md 2025-01-16 18:43:01.835296714 +0100
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@
## How the Process Works
1. Clone
- https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git .
+ https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD mus=
t not
@@ -92,15 +92,16 @@
## Roles
- - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the RFC.
+ - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
conclusion.
- A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
- RFC by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
+ GCD by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
- timekeepers.
+ timekeepers. As a sponsor, please make sure that all have the time
+ and space for expressing their comments.
Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommended=
, but
@@ -111,6 +112,10 @@
members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
repository.
+ - A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
+ translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
+ of the Guix community.
+
## Timeline
A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
@@ -118,21 +123,20 @@
```
- +-----------+
- +- - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------------+
- : +-----------+ |
- : ^ |
- : : |
-+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
-| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
-| (up to 7 days) |-->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days)=
|
-+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
- |
- |
++--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
+| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
+| (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days=
) |
++--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +---------------------+
+ : : : |
+ : v : |
+ : declined v |
+ : o-----------o |
+ +- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
+ o-----------o |
V
- +----------+
- | Accepted |
- +----------+
+ o----------o
+ | Accepted |
+ o----------o
```
The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
@@ -150,8 +154,11 @@
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
-Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed; authors are encouraged to
-publish updated versions incorporating feedback during the discussion.
+Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
+community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
+incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
+share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
+included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
@@ -159,8 +166,11 @@
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
-All team members can participate in deliberation and are encouraged to
-do so.
+Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
+below.
+
+Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
+to contribute to the deliberation.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
@@ -176,13 +186,6 @@
reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
*withdrawn*.
-Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
-below.
-
-Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
-to contribute to the deliberation. Team members are defined by the
-file etc/teams.scm (see =E2=80=9CTeams=E2=80=9D in the manual).
-
GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
the participants consent to its implementation.
@@ -215,7 +218,7 @@
`status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
- `status` header accordingly);
+ `status` header accordingly with `deprecated`);
2. committing everything;
3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
Diff finished. Thu Jan 16 18:44:37 2025
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
--
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/markdown; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=001-gcd-process-v9.md
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: GCD
title: Guix Consensus Document Process
id: 001
status: submitted
discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus
date-submitted: 2024-12-12
date: 2025-01-15
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
---
# Summary
This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the
Guix project. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
on important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to
weigh in.
# Motivation
Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
keep track of all of them.
The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
=E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the communit=
y at large
and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only be =
reverted at a
high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
- changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
- adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
- changing the channel mechanism;
- changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
deprecation policy, or this very document;
- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.).
# Detailed Design
## When to Follow This Process
The GCD process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, whic=
h include:
- changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
(command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
- big restructuring of packages;
- hard to revert changes;
- significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
- governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
GCD first.
Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require a GCD; examples include:
- adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
- fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
interfaces;
- updating the manual, updating translations;
- changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure
in a user-invisible way.
These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
## How the Process Works
1. Clone
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD must=
not
be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
deprecate a previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*:
one or more people who will support the GCD and participate in
discussions by your side (see below).
The GCD is *submitted* once it has at least one sponsor in addition to
the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D below.
Submitted GCD is announced at `info-guix@HIDDEN`.
## Roles
- An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
conclusion.
- A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
GCD by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
timekeepers. As a sponsor, please make sure that all have the time
and space for expressing their comments.
Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommended,=
but
not mandatory, to be a team member.
- A *team member* is the member of a team, as defined by the Guix
project in the manual. Currently, the list of teams and their
members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
repository.
- A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
of the Guix community.
## Timeline
A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
consisting of several *periods*.
```
+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
| (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days)=
|
+--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +---------------------+
: : : |
: v : |
: declined v |
: o-----------o |
+- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
o-----------o |
V
o----------o
| Accepted |
o----------o
```
The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
Anyone can author and submit a GCD as a regular patch and look for
sponsors (see below). The GCD is *submitted* once one or more people
have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=
=80=9D; it is
canceled if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
is the *discussion period*.
Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
later, possibly under a new GCD number.
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
announce the start of the *deliberation period*.
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
below.
Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
to contribute to the deliberation.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
- =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementati=
on of the
proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementati=
on of the
proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made
constructive comments during the discussion period.
The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
*withdrawn*.
GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
the participants consent to its implementation.
Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it
could mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in
the GCD are accepted by the community.
## Decision Making
Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions
that everyone can live with.
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
details, you are encouraged to read
<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
## Merging Final GCDs
Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a committer merges the final GCD
following these steps:
1. filling in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the
`status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
`status` header accordingly with `deprecated`);
2. committing everything;
3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
All the GCDs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike
4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
[GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html) or (at your option)
any later version.
## GCD Template
The expected structure of GCDs is captured by the template in the file
`000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown syntax.
## Cost of Reverting
The GCD process described in this document can be amended by subsequent
GCDs.
## Drawbacks
There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more t=
han
it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help
contribution, not an end in itself.
Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices
and notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon,
and solicit opinions of those who remained silent.
## Open Issues
There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
While we want to ensure that technical changes that affect users are
well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become undu=
ly
burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to
maintain moving forward.
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 00:53:23 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 19:53:23 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35264 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYabu-0006uL-6Z
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:53:23 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x32a.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32a]:54720)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYabq-0006u5-LH
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:53:16 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x32a.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4361815b96cso9842165e9.1
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:53:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737075188; x=1737679988; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:to:from
:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=m+SuEFyCCV4Ba5vk04aKKnkOfZ0VvInNA5A8ppNWebk=;
b=MGnv4Mc6oaGtRDElB1VIgVajgZ9axUl2v1cbN0rUXmmz4m4kR8MJDaPL+KlAl6IolO
FUVHuI+vtMsTUdv8vKyagkaMnND3vkKhWJjsXU6DxPZ02jvBQOy+4KJzdohSlGmzl3CF
OVHxHa36PAhTlj9X4VkdvgNjRxBhovthHZNuf/LtETB0rbFMg101AWYp5+CNyC4uFh7d
8G6x6bg/rzm9t4BdXVfSZa70EZjX/CS2PQf2U939v7VhwGhntXiinE7hTRi657niPKuT
M5UG8J81gaJK0JNxLi0wcSnIygWFVaGVFzaNL51Bj4fkXb6gboHJhyY96b3lBV35Qcs6
kqtw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737075188; x=1737679988;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:to:from
:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=m+SuEFyCCV4Ba5vk04aKKnkOfZ0VvInNA5A8ppNWebk=;
b=Ksl8oCqbELyqr2PtXddFWg+RKqKUYM5KwNYbXi2o4iD/6qGvNwBGcVPkhFWcaKRspj
5EwGB1XFYX4kh933F9YUxNlhxjSx0Ab48F4MfNb1Q+/gpLugnCWZ9X97Fb9GWk5Zr1sS
8X7n6kCp1wAIJ7ZlpzReR3VUvIkE4bErPATIt5bbqAgN8p5bcbTnvLF9i8JOrkwqte/o
SSveALjgwoCLGuCtQ9ur+ydeMhbgs3o/FIzNg90WyEsMgfzVZGg/lxAxjWbEKvA3/d9s
msWkXZyYCt7hlfPWpY5Y7tkXXO6rRUw/WctDlf6AWKuq8cxgFowAz6rrQG5XLBF++5pX
XYxg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy29bi5KcKCveDMxNerF2E2GvrO1Pws8g5f+tocQy0aJyf/65WF
raLHdqAeZX4QTL6EoMjqmFiLallOAHZWGZV39vFY8uXoDlCAzGK/PPG1qA==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvs2va79+CY5woMGEJ1UV2BAKFSdz9HIy7mT5lgjTYhCqU3wj3uOW5xqcc+1xn
zPpSWY8m9FSNjsRh+ljOCULLLDX8ICDj3938bgDCkJUR7Hlaz4MLmeBxDEyA0lQGsrrTjZ1d9xD
WKum3D+uU7rk1WNXBnTq7zYPzwoe1VehYgIUnIG4S4HyTj2P1Lr0oKzExr00n0noGqkt0vmk4c3
VTiA+3nWMy7NUulvcnV4Tj1iqNGu+aReniu5ZW8rdcSVn694qGC/g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEKSd9vvzcCQo051O+SGbX1r4YWf3oPzeAxgikgFVFlwe9TuhRl8krYbDdpOmcJkzfK/6kifw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1d07:b0:436:488f:50a with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-438913ef4b7mr5653485e9.17.1737075188421;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:53:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:cadd:a17:8766:e21f])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-437c753caf3sm73558385e9.38.2025.01.16.16.53.06
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:53:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#74736] [PATCH v10] Add Guix Consensus Document process
In-Reply-To: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 01:53:02 +0100
Message-ID: <87h65ymfbl.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
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-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
I sent v9 (Message-ID: 8734hiskwm.fsf@HIDDEN) but that has not
reached the list, hum?! And Hartmut sent a diff as v9, hence v10. :-)
Changes compared to v8:
=E2=80=A2 Changed some level for the subtitles. And added =E2=80=9CGettin=
g Started=E2=80=9D.
=20
=E2=80=A2 Removed trailing dot after repository URL.
=E2=80=A2 Reworded =E2=80=99prospective=E2=80=99.
=E2=80=A2 Removed redundant information about =E2=80=9Csubmitted=E2=80=9D =
and pointed to the
dedicated section. Clarified using the term =E2=80=9Cdraft=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=A2 Replaced the term RFC by GCD.
=E2=80=A2 Added a sentence about the role of =E2=80=9CSponsor=E2=80=9D. A=
nd added a
=E2=80=9CContributor=E2=80=9D role. The idea is to rely on that term fo=
r clarifying
=E2=80=9Cauthor=E2=80=9D and who can discuss. But then, the term does n=
ot appear=E2=80=A6
=E2=80=A2 Add section =E2=80=9CChannel of Communication=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=A2 Revamped the artist view of the timeline.
=E2=80=A2 Minor tweaks under =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=A2 Minor tweaks under =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D. Added a=
paragraph to deal
with the case where =E2=80=9CAuthor=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CSponsor=E2=80=
=9D vanish.
=E2=80=A2 Minor tweaks under =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D: moved =
sentence; removed
redundant information.
=E2=80=A2 Minor tweaks under =E2=80=9CMerging GCD=E2=80=9D.
WDYT?
Cheers,
simon
--
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=v8-v10.diff
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: diff
diff -u /tmp/001-gcd-process-v8.md /tmp/001-gcd-process-v10.md
--- /tmp/001-gcd-process-v8.md 2025-01-17 01:21:27.574454166 +0100
+++ /tmp/001-gcd-process-v10.md 2025-01-17 01:36:03.524561874 +0100
@@ -70,37 +70,39 @@
These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
-## How the Process Works
+# How the Process Works
+
+## Getting Started
1. Clone
- https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git .
+ https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
-3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD mus=
t not
- be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
- implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
+3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD must
+ describe a concrete idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even
+ if not all details are known; the GCD must not be a brainstorming
+ session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal. If it intends to
deprecate a previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*:
one or more people who will support the GCD and participate in
discussions by your side (see below).
-The GCD is *submitted* once it has at least one sponsor in addition to
-the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D below.
-
-Submitted GCD is announced at `info-guix@HIDDEN`.
+The GCD is now in =E2=80=9Cdraft=E2=80=9D state and will be *submitted* on=
ce it has at least
+one sponsor in addition to the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=
=E2=80=9D below.
## Roles
- - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the RFC.
+ - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
conclusion.
- A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
- RFC by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
+ GCD by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
- timekeepers.
+ timekeepers. As a sponsor, please make sure that all have the time
+ and space for expressing their comments.
Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommended=
, but
@@ -111,6 +113,20 @@
members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
repository.
+ - A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
+ translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
+ of the Guix community.
+
+## Channels of Communication
+
+ - The *draft* is sent to `guix-devel@HIDDEN`.
+
+ - Once *submitted*, the GCD is announced to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and discu=
ssed
+ using the assigned issue number.
+
+ - The *final* document is published to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and the
+ deliberating replies are sent to the assigned issue number.
+
## Timeline
A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
@@ -118,49 +134,60 @@
```
- +-----------+
- +- - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------------+
- : +-----------+ |
- : ^ |
- : : |
-+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
-| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
-| (up to 7 days) |-->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days)=
|
-+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
- |
- |
+ draft submitted final
++--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
+| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
+| (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days=
) |
++--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +---------------------+
+ : : : |
+ : v : |
+ : canceled v |
+ : o-----------o |
+ +- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
+ o-----------o |
V
- +----------+
- | Accepted |
- +----------+
+ o----------o
+ | Accepted |
+ o----------o
```
The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
-Anyone can author and submit a GCD as a regular patch and look for
-sponsors (see below). The GCD is *submitted* once one or more people
+Anyone can author and propose a GCD as a regular patch and look for
+sponsors (see =E2=80=9CRoles=E2=80=9D). The GCD is *submitted* once one o=
r more people
have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=
=80=9D; it is
-canceled if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
+*canceled* if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
is the *discussion period*.
Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
-later, possibly under a new GCD number.
+later (under a new GCD number).
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
-Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed; authors are encouraged to
-publish updated versions incorporating feedback during the discussion.
+Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
+community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
+incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
+share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
+included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
announce the start of the *deliberation period*.
+If after 60 days, a final version is not yet published, then a grace period
+of 14 days is granted. Finally the GCD is considered as *stale* and the l=
ast
+update is picked for the final version.
+
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
-All team members can participate in deliberation and are encouraged to
-do so.
+Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
+below.
+
+The *deliberation period* starts when the authors publish a final version =
of
+the GCD at `info-guix@HIDDEN`. Anyone who is a team member is a
+deliberating member and is encouraged to contribute to the deliberation.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
@@ -172,16 +199,9 @@
proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made
constructive comments during the discussion period.
-The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
-reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
-*withdrawn*.
-
-Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
-below.
-
-Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
-to contribute to the deliberation. Team members are defined by the
-file etc/teams.scm (see =E2=80=9CTeams=E2=80=9D in the manual).
+The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members=E2=80=93as of
+the start of the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D=E2=80=93send a repl=
y, and (2) no one
+disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*.
GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
@@ -206,16 +226,16 @@
details, you are encouraged to read
<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
-## Merging Final GCDs
+## Merging GCD
-Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a committer merges the final GCD
-following these steps:
+Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a person who has commit permission
+to the GCD repository merges the GCD following these steps:
1. filling in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the
`status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
- `status` header accordingly);
+ `status` header accordingly with `deprecated`);
2. committing everything;
3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
Diff finished. Fri Jan 17 01:36:38 2025
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
--
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/markdown; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=001-gcd-process-v10.md
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: 001-gcd-process-v10.md
title: Guix Consensus Document Process
id: 001
status: submitted
discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus
date-submitted: 2024-12-12
date: 2025-01-15
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
---
# Summary
This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the
Guix project. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
on important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to
weigh in.
# Motivation
Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
keep track of all of them.
The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
=E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the communit=
y at large
and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only be =
reverted at a
high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
- changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
- adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
- changing the channel mechanism;
- changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
deprecation policy, or this very document;
- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.).
# Detailed Design
## When to Follow This Process
The GCD process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, whic=
h include:
- changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
(command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
- big restructuring of packages;
- hard to revert changes;
- significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
- governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
GCD first.
Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require a GCD; examples include:
- adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
- fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
interfaces;
- updating the manual, updating translations;
- changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure
in a user-invisible way.
These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
# How the Process Works
## Getting Started
1. Clone
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD must=
=20
describe a concrete idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even=20
if not all details are known; the GCD must not be a brainstorming
session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal. If it intends to
deprecate a previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*:
one or more people who will support the GCD and participate in
discussions by your side (see below).
The GCD is now in =E2=80=9Cdraft=E2=80=9D state and will be *submitted* onc=
e it has at least
one sponsor in addition to the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=
=E2=80=9D below.
## Roles
- An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
conclusion.
- A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
GCD by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
timekeepers. As a sponsor, please make sure that all have the time
and space for expressing their comments.
Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommended,=
but
not mandatory, to be a team member.
- A *team member* is the member of a team, as defined by the Guix
project in the manual. Currently, the list of teams and their
members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
repository.
- A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
of the Guix community.
## Channels of Communication
- The *draft* is sent to `guix-devel@HIDDEN`.
=20
- Once *submitted*, the GCD is announced to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and discus=
sed
using the assigned issue number.
=20=20=20
- The *final* document is published to `info-guix@HIDDEN` and the
deliberating replies are sent to the assigned issue number.
## Timeline
A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
consisting of several *periods*.
```
draft submitted final
+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
| (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days)=
|
+--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +---------------------+
: : : |
: v : |
: canceled v |
: o-----------o |
+- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
o-----------o |
V
o----------o
| Accepted |
o----------o
```
The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
Anyone can author and propose a GCD as a regular patch and look for
sponsors (see =E2=80=9CRoles=E2=80=9D). The GCD is *submitted* once one or=
more people
have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=
=80=9D; it is
*canceled* if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
is the *discussion period*.
Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
later (under a new GCD number).
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
announce the start of the *deliberation period*.
If after 60 days, a final version is not yet published, then a grace period
of 14 days is granted. Finally the GCD is considered as *stale* and the la=
st=20
update is picked for the final version.
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
below.
The *deliberation period* starts when the authors publish a final version of
the GCD at `info-guix@HIDDEN`. Anyone who is a team member is a
deliberating member and is encouraged to contribute to the deliberation.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
- =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementati=
on of the
proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementati=
on of the
proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made
constructive comments during the discussion period.
The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members=E2=80=93as of=
=20
the start of the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D=E2=80=93send a reply=
, and (2) no one=20
disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is *withdrawn*.
GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
the participants consent to its implementation.
Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it
could mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in
the GCD are accepted by the community.
## Decision Making
Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions
that everyone can live with.
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
details, you are encouraged to read
<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
## Merging GCD
Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a person who has commit permission=20
to the GCD repository merges the GCD following these steps:
1. filling in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the
`status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
`status` header accordingly with `deprecated`);
2. committing everything;
3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
All the GCDs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike
4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
[GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html) or (at your option)
any later version.
## GCD Template
The expected structure of GCDs is captured by the template in the file
`000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown syntax.
## Cost of Reverting
The GCD process described in this document can be amended by subsequent
GCDs.
## Drawbacks
There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more t=
han
it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help
contribution, not an end in itself.
Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices
and notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon,
and solicit opinions of those who remained silent.
## Open Issues
There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
While we want to ensure that technical changes that affect users are
well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become undu=
ly
burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to
maintain moving forward.
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 00:44:31 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 19:44:31 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35246 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYaTP-0006Ut-9g
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:44:31 -0500
Received: from mail-wr1-x436.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::436]:61724)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYaT4-0006Tb-1P
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:44:10 -0500
Received: by mail-wr1-x436.google.com with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-3862a921123so1093806f8f.3
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737074644; x=1737679444; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=UlS8mBfV7hGUgNJC06Pg8dmjSz02LB4KDHDC/N/jxZs=;
b=T7YvLBm7+TESMGifIzBXTTKOExGgSYKj5Q28O9XFBB0PuFYllaNvGvx7cAXXx5BlWT
JeoMPjLaC/xI6yemene80rnLDdgMMzEezPh8u8Ggnfsz/+HVtki+jkhHO13bIScJECd+
fV3QWQMiXSS8x9cOxPhiCZufvcCepL3wInAKu4pgamPxvJKsUDq7RFKRuQT54fIjulYc
r3W5VYASY/DU6qYCxk5En7mxlskpPtyqAUB7OEzLptZOPtKVkI7FwsB+pJADaYtbKZ1d
R3ozqrEpj0t/aQgVsBZm6e80OnETwsm8sVdtjC0tLIDS+kx6cuQBLujaBbv8q4W6Gg7b
9asQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737074644; x=1737679444;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject
:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=UlS8mBfV7hGUgNJC06Pg8dmjSz02LB4KDHDC/N/jxZs=;
b=dJo4LfatGQ6gIq9skAICQtbteGDLK2FPn9a5nAP80b1r9Jl3EB5wF5ZtzllKZN5hwq
/FUBSsYH1JygEcMuS0yWqLogXRtks4Xqk/e+AHC5GVjZTjbqq4czDJS6FCF+pzaXloQ9
Ea18Y5Dr7e6cLECp/5DA0E04W6n0vqz1qWR8p3nfGqn7xatEQRjBpjjGcsXanCJnr6PI
T2hI15+IjltFB8c+1DwY1CgZQuG32Tr7GtzLl7hNNC+K7o2/ka0Qv1Nhd04AvvEvL7+e
0eJZeJqXIkjOWlRnqFlN658z/mPTf1dEdGTx8psFyQz4mZfVqu4dLCvf2xD3k8ztwXjR
SVgw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCXvHSUT3dXkPg8ZJfHGgGEuB58k4GofaW0iXjGhYZElhWwE1Aq+O513ers13MCUe6qgEZmehA==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyvKEmFSMI3ZTD7exvcpj3JXoLaPkTj2wStiWn/EW0Z5LAi2N/k
BWwXjp3EH+7U8erE09Hl8sl3g92KXWY+YXYrm0YTQKJ6AJK4SVvSAKUL6A==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctnehQZd5ui1UbaomS2jSr8OtmXdmS7p0TBtkuiQrP8lgbndRCmDvi8u6T9K62
rtdg8D1NBVpXScoW9mfcXwUaxmPoNzei6UM+LYG96WWKNqSohE7bexsFy1yJYLTf3jVixfXvuSE
gZ631Sr0gFcvWPJRj5ymnApFVKJJx/lb0YlWSZJOr2aHr+I/QqtFn1SRpLdVS7cN+8YpTptAmGa
itXXS/ueMgiVLSjsDXj+efsr4il5WCSUdOP81zAGPWZE0D7/hsD8A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHiKTLwnNdJ/e4lEgsFRSBkpbzO6dKccScWNAgSKoe/DpLIeVg45HtvPArCxLgUqDwQ79OZPw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1863:b0:385:df4e:366f with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38bf57a97c7mr599893f8f.38.1737074643902;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:cadd:a17:8766:e21f])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-437c0f026c0sm50922775e9.0.2025.01.16.16.44.03
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] Re v8 of Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <54393837-c762-4eb2-a3fb-0d566583b88d@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN>
<87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN>
<54393837-c762-4eb2-a3fb-0d566583b88d@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 01:20:38 +0100
Message-ID: <8734hinve1.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: 74736
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,
Thanks for your comments. I included with v10. WDYT?
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 20:50, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>=
wrote:
> The current text does not state this. Rather it implies, the sequence=20
> number is to be picked when creating the draft ("How the Process Works",=
=20
> number 2). So if two persons draft a GCD at nearly the same time, how to=
=20
> prevent both are picking the same number? (See proposal below.)
Well, from my point of view, considering the number of changes requiring
GCD that we did over the past years, I think the situation will not
happen. :-)
Still, how to resolve in practise when that would happen? I think the
simplest is to consider the sequence order for the final document (the
only that really matters after all) as the first that had been in
*submitted* state using the timestamps of the sponsors.
A good ol=E2=80=99 First In, First Numbered. ;-)
> It also came to my mind, that the text does not explain who is pushing=20
> the patch to the GCD repo and when (at which point in the process).=20
> Proposed text:
>
> At the end of section "Submission Period":
It appears to me clearer to separate the concerns. What do you think
about =E2=80=9CMerging GCD=E2=80=9D?
> In <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/74736#58> Ludo wrote: "It has to=20
> be at most 60 days, I think that=E2=80=99s quite clear."
>
> Either way, this need to be stated more explicit.
I added the *stale* state and how to deal with it. WDYT?
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 00:44:18 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 19:44:18 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35244 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYaTB-0006UQ-Ok for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:44:18 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x329.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::329]:43237) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tYaT1-0006TN-Ja for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:44:07 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x329.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4363dc916ceso16346235e9.0 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737074641; x=1737679441; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=qb3zrwaS7eB0diMJ/r+0YMLsTs7/MYfPyQYAG7+EO5k=; b=lOKcwJ7aSlCFYsxPRWzZBl42/BbnydBzdWd1Szk6oPGuacDRxN+96n5t+/UqFjCi8L PigZNYgRypeRDpW6xxQpTwdylRkEsPLyU1xQuxwibKVFy54QPA1MOVAtXTtyYXDsVGAT c7XD1TvmC0wbQJ6I1OO9arRy/P3Ic1eTEsqdVVhTHiqIpUJDh+1B9tAVi6uGdm3fRi7w jUmFmrNhkNtIsVyGm0hpYlh8oEddsUwwv4+Vc37rn/Q9Yut9ccGmaeu523YJLhKpKxZa 3osCjpp95zuVMdDL1gkFcQ3pK1yL04x1WXSo0smFlxsqgvX4uKN/VZMhHguXcQ+W9XSY aJkQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737074641; x=1737679441; 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=qb3zrwaS7eB0diMJ/r+0YMLsTs7/MYfPyQYAG7+EO5k=; b=JjFcI7UWxWGmm3rcGcoGJDJJIwnT/xulF3HFrjjjr7Tgm1sG20N4jCypuVJYVaAZU8 m/hibXYfAtO9RwXBx9o53BxrB4xV0Bp11rM7tlGlBV/X0lJDRorpPU9zm7AnYslK7J4H uSD5as0vYyZP/SCK7Tr5Twji7Zqq++r/NLKOoDUNbrnR317Emkt2ORHU4YElbxGiXd5z IoruEcaQaS+cfsLEaZm+sQNMtxSPNsb7FzXea0xVvtaoO41iRVVpOi4nNbBZ/bQrZ5YB b9Nz1onW7wc9CDuyem6Oo1QiXYFqha1qtpOpxQdNFcWuw63rdKTmTvBbSQyp7RtkRhA6 eJAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzk5rTeKO7wASf5gcgG2470/bB6vBHYyXlp6Lp+dWz8/v1dMX1f Cx8wbbCg2KP0XcWZy+cnkue+SlgK8jX4waLEXVMryr7ieguTFsABe9y6Iw== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncs8Wy+frWsC1ep53W8h8w/WuCD+58eOzWq9kxnSC/HFfUXRL3XqPOnpIWLXajz H3XrrXewwQ6GbnM56zkwMdP70GQYBGPcG6xg0Wr9IhWJ4WdhPFKB+PeVG/zkGEd3OGpCr6+N5pM wOfGV+Z1XB+lXDqIw6y6SJOoFdht+qYMpCRKAMSDlZVxI/qC92Sf37HGGCbYQxZU4zG8GlhB4Na Q+2KmEgafmaazemBJqeZeuc0WehyxMHjLwgO91+EtqhkezwLQujQA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGqX0oCVY2c8qQ7il5KY5gL02zukkRVCsRAHVdkvC2qtI33cyLetlEeHhr2BAL0ipqAE/cM0Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2c1:b0:38a:4df5:a08 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38bec542ba4mr4927924f8f.22.1737074641568; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:cadd:a17:8766:e21f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38bf3221b5asm1090504f8f.21.2025.01.16.16.43.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:01 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <d03e9184-f567-4963-85b8-12e93435330c@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN> <87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ec3ea9b4-8792-4f91-b324-e714cc7f0c57@HIDDEN> <d03e9184-f567-4963-85b8-12e93435330c@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:51:52 +0100 Message-ID: <87h65ynwpz.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 21:41, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN> wrote: > This patch does *not* include my proposals from my other mails today, > but new ones. > > In addition, I suggest exchanging "Process Overview" and "Roles". I left > this away to keep the patch small. I tried to include all of the suggestions with v10. WDYT? Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 00:44:17 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 19:44:17 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35242 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYaTB-0006UH-8F for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:44:17 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x329.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::329]:58627) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tYaSy-0006T6-NA for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:44:05 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x329.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4362bae4d7dso10064225e9.1 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737074638; x=1737679438; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=RDXyrCSmsrBMMKAC9K+wCduToYMo6k9y5+s7DeBsHN8=; b=gD5MF4iSQKh+AfXWMGW51oyY+iPtqHAsOztKXjBmqKb8y9e+IVaaY/HIWj+5CYxGGe LRE0SBFlHu+KuCtxqMQPFw+SCYeFdKfeQINsayK+dSjq6dpek09T1TNOBbPSXeCX5Tm1 H+atQ8ScoNedMsTRrYNBTNqN5QNNolDU5JZQ9UFWaU7HiazKyr+Kp1G4OL997htOLcU5 eS6I4FgAyIQC6DUC8jSkWO6pjbHbxVQGTuBVM/U3DPNjiaLsef0kaVdXhrSStWP5tfYL JoI5mWR8YH/GaRqnrz5bIEWHkPfbQHbVus1tc2unGsBx17YDXYxY/GAHtVa6BxX45gEI ypIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737074638; x=1737679438; 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=RDXyrCSmsrBMMKAC9K+wCduToYMo6k9y5+s7DeBsHN8=; b=Ij6oQ/4t23uHVV3i35YpMWDH40VFP0vGJiY5h/p67yQkXjdkMctUHLmDtCXigFVs9B gOt1SQfeNCDVHMbVuQ0s44T5ps7RN7ZgSq1C8sjhaA/wXuiwhAtgefxOJ/AECO5iYMEy h6kjMyhmrH70FDKWgJr7DdzIOVnn26gLkBIi42H2wwbrKK9oxJ0zeLIE159a5DxSeDyD ZrWHTTJpTw3jYGrg7egx9h6SedkH2tZeMETxToA7goM3xiU3K4NfijXin6u58LAdt7am Rm7rORkRq8EOOiN8zrXwIWq+VrA5W2zjbDLfwS+taJiGxEXjdQ+QhjGmJTbQdtTAK4F6 HjHQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz1BSnndVErNhDuT1KPHg5gpSvHoaiPH28DsZMN2IHCIY3YrFNB R9LKUcf2sNN6eiIHK2Jk0U6WfvU7jNMWmfy6XQjn/joSgRqMw6QG1UcMiA== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsuOReG/gKEC12Lc96VvJRcICy/X4E6gzuu9nsaeeTbJV9X0s74ObymXfCxscM vTWzeLUx39Wy0MydhRUjY9j6h0S/N+kVMEyId6a5ErqQr2w6aDhCCpCmisfoknnBBxItbxQ+VZi f291EkimRR4xrGLWP03Ay/W88ErQhPzUbyFVSQD9rRflyWKkj9/xTYWzpIUvPIkkvyeWhrs1FzW 0Tg2zUcBdpECoKpaa4S2L7TT1X3QTna6jdUY/mrkpGcTGNMBnlhpA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFG8R+1gvBDi/fOFHOhAac6vi+F6zk92QyV9UU9mjvI7Lc1U9aZuuq48yp1HxjuzLsny1CqSQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4c92:0:b0:38b:f4dc:4483 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38bf5671cb2mr365782f8f.29.1737074638480; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:43:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:cadd:a17:8766:e21f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38bf3215482sm1095009f8f.5.2025.01.16.16.43.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:43:58 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <ec3ea9b4-8792-4f91-b324-e714cc7f0c57@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN> <87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ec3ea9b4-8792-4f91-b324-e714cc7f0c57@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:50:23 +0100 Message-ID: <87ldvanwsg.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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 20:43, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>= wrote: > After reading <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/74736#70> I now=20 > understood that the base idea behind decision making is "Consensus".=20 > This is mentioned in "motivation", but rather like a side note than as=20 > an important principle. > > Therefore I propose moving the section "Decision Making" into=20 > "Motivation" =E2=80=93 or make it a top-level section just below "Motivat= ion". When reading, I said yes why not. Then re-reading after moving, I thought that =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D is a component of the =E2=80= =9CDetailed Design=E2=80=9D. > "=E2=80=A6 25% of all team members =E2=80=93 as of the start of the Delib= eration Period =E2=80=93 =E2=80=A6" Thanks, I agree that it clarifies. Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 00:44:17 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 19:44:17 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35237 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYaT1-0006Tp-CP
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:44:17 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x32a.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32a]:47474)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYaSw-0006Sx-LI
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:44:05 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x32a.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4364a37a1d7so14408495e9.3
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:44:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737074636; x=1737679436; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=yfMqCW5ql2UJNoJUBUQLSRaPi/e7VqvFW9shrHdAMPo=;
b=cK29IqDB3mje+YT/6zRVabVDsGcSb/jVwAihy15NOQiC1nuDz7EsDcsuj7KWyqmKE6
mphyPLDy0X1ZMVjGePdfEgL/WVYnUuFVx8xCDBRLMEvgwt2UbIB29yIuTOfu9AyLvYEE
6AbeIT5vOUvUxz/zNRjjKGsDaFz3dVKSpR8mFN5thX46acV/FXzbaNjdgeVXdc//OF7N
++u2a1R+T1m4ajLU1PxEmm+AEPsALhQbbUG8zqdkcqyTx65zW6X5DKeNuu4NC0+gEr7B
J3OwfRz/vzT53pGrouwn6shbAzQQx+qqYMxHqdi4mrROedqZx+9YuSTJN6s7zg+K0qYg
38HA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737074636; x=1737679436;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject
:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=yfMqCW5ql2UJNoJUBUQLSRaPi/e7VqvFW9shrHdAMPo=;
b=HA6KSRSvtBoVNfK2LpXj09TfAol+L4g4qqLNCvcG5p0yyDsJwq8dHr4SVu2dFXS14q
PapVAqYDYdr0HBMwHUJFngKHdgRiccyvM2i3CW4zdEOi7QjXqqD+OJSDsDTL78jmvm4K
8fcxIM+oTIsz0VQy6LdA57QIOj34ybLY5KC8HGgNpymllYxXsyqfUVNN3SsBBRzWYW/V
rWSFIm2IAt9J2+dbGftbsKqcWk/RZnmXcyqG/jyEu5b9v11tcD5Omw3qMouXYVuZX0Qz
ik1hrJH1WA9y6fsegspktOSR2qBsVs/h41AnE4WISIQYtQ+Xtjv92330uNh+5Vm9v4FQ
GXtQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxRepx5D3as8psKR9ie3n0Jc/ZAtGYsBvgpIaytP8vIRJK58XXF
LZwf4yokcmPAMgpIU8303iN1XHzhuR83A2HnBfBYWlUzcx123mCHfWY0Cg==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncttUEV00LEVPnsacJYJOt1XqC+ja56uVdN0TdrZ3lO7NT0sOtY+y7djoRulOZj
HFqOMy2eFLERN1vcsqRpCuCvw99/Wm+Z/BxqhIk+T9/rAttBnmgL4Q1DtEWnbIwzaYzQdQw7N/Z
caPCEgXnJoI8DPYbA+VYu+GScHMoRw8ljBkVUvBvSn5pQ0Za6vI8hHhLUgP0fixTBoEFi36rLBT
IzVJNeVq0mQzeiXa2UqhPNXsCr7jUP6XDfdcjzZtIUzrXdCNKtcpw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGC/sgZKB697fkvZFQ3YfyxXxLlZyiMX8lEw2O1xUhOB8IrNWBHKevJuQjoEuGpqRgwai8JnA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3486:b0:434:a10f:9b with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-438913e287cmr6052985e9.14.1737074635776;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:43:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:cadd:a17:8766:e21f])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-437c7499821sm75029025e9.2.2025.01.16.16.43.54
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 16:43:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Do you read it? (was: [bug#74736] [PATCH v9] Add Guix Consensus
Document process)
In-Reply-To: <8734hiskwm.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <8734hiskwm.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:13:45 +0100
Message-ID: <87plkmnyhi.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: 74736
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,
The number v9 of my message is superseded by Hartmut message:
[bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 21:41:26 +0100
id:d03e9184-f567-4963-85b8-12e93435330c@HIDDEN
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/d03e9184-f567-4963-85b8-12e934353=
30c@HIDDEN
https://yhetil.org/guix/d03e9184-f567-4963-85b8-12e93435330c@crazy-=
compilers.com
BTW, that=E2=80=99s weird! The message with the header below appears in my=
Sent
folder (Gmail webinterface) but has not reached the list. Hum?
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
Return-Path: <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-41.net.univ-paris-diderot.f=
r. [194.254.61.41])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-437c7499884sm684890=
05e9.5.2025.01.16.10.02.10
(version=3DTLS1_3 cipher=3DTLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=3D256/256);
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: =3D?utf-8?Q?No=3DC3=3DA9?=3D Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =3D?utf-=
8?Q?Court?=3D
=3D?utf-8?Q?=3DC3=3DA8s?=3D <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <guix@HIDDEN>, "Artyom V. Poptsov"
<poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>, Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>,
"pukkamustard" <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>, Vagrant Cascadian
<vagrant@HIDDEN>, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN>, Ricardo
Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>, Hartmut Goebel
<h.goebel@HIDDEN>, Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>,
bokr@HIDDEN, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, GNU Guix maintainers
<guix-maintainers@HIDDEN>
Subject: [bug#74736] [PATCH v9] Add Guix Consensus Document process
In-Reply-To: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 18:55:53 +0100
Message-ID: <8734hiskwm.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=3D"=3D-=3D-=3D"
--=3D-=3D-=3D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Cheers,
simon
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 18:55, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> wro=
te:
> Hi,
>
> Please find attach the v9; I hope it addresses the comments.
>
> Attached the diff and the document. The minor changes are:
>
> =E2=80=A2 Point alone =E2=80=9C1. Clone =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D
>
> =E2=80=A2 Replace remaining RFC with GCD.
>
> =E2=80=A2 Add a sentence about =E2=80=9CSponsor=E2=80=9D role.
>
> =E2=80=A2 Add the role of =E2=80=9CContributor=E2=80=9D.
>
> =E2=80=A2 Tweak the artist view of the Timeline
>
> =E2=80=A2 Explicit mention that everyone can participate to the =E2=80=
=9CDiscussion
> Period=E2=80=9D. And mention that the main concerns and/or opposition=
are
> collected to the final document.
>
> =E2=80=A2 Move upfront the aim of =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D.=
Remove a redundant
> sentence.
>
> =E2=80=A2 Explicit mention the state =E2=80=98deprecated=E2=80=99.
>
>
> WDYT?
>
> Cheers,
> simon
>
> --
>
> diff -u /tmp/001-gcd-process-v8.md /tmp/001-gcd-process-v9.md
> --- /tmp/001-gcd-process-v8.md 2025-01-16 16:51:08.758030546 +0100
> +++ /tmp/001-gcd-process-v9.md 2025-01-16 18:43:01.835296714 +0100
> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@
> ## How the Process Works
>
> 1. Clone
> - https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git .
> + https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
> 2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
> is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
> 3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD m=
ust not
> @@ -92,15 +92,16 @@
>
> ## Roles
>
> - - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the RFC.
> + - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
> Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
> conclusion.
>
> - A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
> below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
> - RFC by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
> + GCD by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
> to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
> - timekeepers.
> + timekeepers. As a sponsor, please make sure that all have the time
> + and space for expressing their comments.
>
> Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
> familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommend=
ed, but
> @@ -111,6 +112,10 @@
> members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
> repository.
>
> + - A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
> + translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
> + of the Guix community.
> +
> ## Timeline
>
> A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
> @@ -118,21 +123,20 @@
>
>
> ```
> - +-----------+
> - +- - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------------+
> - : +-----------+ |
> - : ^ |
> - : : |
> -+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +--------------------=
-+
> -| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period=
|
> -| (up to 7 days) |-->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 day=
s) |
> -+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +--------------------=
-+
> - |
> - |
> ++--------------------+ +---------------------+ +-------------------=
--+
> +| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Perio=
d |
> +| (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 da=
ys) |
> ++--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +-------------------=
--+
> + : : : |
> + : v : |
> + : declined v |
> + : o-----------o |
> + +- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
> + o-----------o |
> V
> - +----------+
> - | Accepted |
> - +----------+
> + o----------o
> + | Accepted |
> + o----------o
> ```
>
> The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
> @@ -150,8 +154,11 @@
>
> ### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
>
> -Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed; authors are encouraged to
> -publish updated versions incorporating feedback during the discussion.
> +Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
> +community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
> +incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
> +share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
> +included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
>
> When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
> of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
> @@ -159,8 +166,11 @@
>
> ### Deliberation Period (14 days)
>
> -All team members can participate in deliberation and are encouraged to
> -do so.
> +Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Maki=
ng=E2=80=9D
> +below.
> +
> +Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
> +to contribute to the deliberation.
>
> Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
> one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
> @@ -176,13 +186,6 @@
> reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
> *withdrawn*.
>
> -Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Maki=
ng=E2=80=9D
> -below.
> -
> -Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
> -to contribute to the deliberation. Team members are defined by the
> -file etc/teams.scm (see =E2=80=9CTeams=E2=80=9D in the manual).
> -
> GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
> the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
> the participants consent to its implementation.
> @@ -215,7 +218,7 @@
> `status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
> discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
> previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
> - `status` header accordingly);
> + `status` header accordingly with `deprecated`);
> 2. committing everything;
> 3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
>
>
> Diff finished. Thu Jan 16 18:44:37 2025
>
> --
>
> title: Guix Consensus Document Process
> id: 001
> status: submitted
> discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
> authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
> sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus
> date-submitted: 2024-12-12
> date: 2025-01-15
> SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
> ---
>
> # Summary
>
> This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the
> Guix project. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
> structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
> affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
> on important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to
> weigh in.
>
> # Motivation
>
> Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
> review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
> does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
> keep track of all of them.
>
> The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
> =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the commun=
ity at large
> and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
> discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
>
> A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only b=
e reverted at a
> high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
> disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
>
> - changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
> - adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
> - changing the channel mechanism;
> - changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
> deprecation policy, or this very document;
> - changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
> lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.).
>
> # Detailed Design
>
> ## When to Follow This Process
>
> The GCD process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, wh=
ich include:
>
> - changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
> (command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
> - big restructuring of packages;
> - hard to revert changes;
> - significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
> - governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
>
> Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
> GCD first.
>
> Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require a GCD; examples include:
>
> - adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
> - fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
> interfaces;
> - updating the manual, updating translations;
> - changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure
> in a user-invisible way.
>
> These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
> by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
>
> ## How the Process Works
>
> 1. Clone
> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git
> 2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
> is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
> 3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD mu=
st not
> be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
> implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
> deprecate a previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
> 4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
> 5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*:
> one or more people who will support the GCD and participate in
> discussions by your side (see below).
>
> The GCD is *submitted* once it has at least one sponsor in addition to
> the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D below.
>
> Submitted GCD is announced at `info-guix@HIDDEN`.
>
> ## Roles
>
> - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the GCD.
> Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
> conclusion.
>
> - A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
> below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
> GCD by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
> to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
> timekeepers. As a sponsor, please make sure that all have the time
> and space for expressing their comments.
>
> Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
> familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommende=
d, but
> not mandatory, to be a team member.
>
> - A *team member* is the member of a team, as defined by the Guix
> project in the manual. Currently, the list of teams and their
> members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
> repository.
>
> - A *contributor* is a person contributing to Guix either with code,
> translation, reviewing, etc. and more broadly any person feeling part
> of the Guix community.
>
> ## Timeline
>
> A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
> consisting of several *periods*.
>
>
> ```
> +--------------------+ +---------------------+ +--------------------=
-+
> | Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period=
|
> | (up to 7 days) |-X->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 day=
s) |
> +--------------------+ : +---------------------+ +--------------------=
-+
> : : : |
> : v : |
> : declined v |
> : o-----------o |
> +- - - - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------- X
> o-----------o |
> V
> o----------o
> | Accepted |
> o----------o
> ```
>
> The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
>
> ### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
>
> Anyone can author and submit a GCD as a regular patch and look for
> sponsors (see below). The GCD is *submitted* once one or more people
> have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=
=E2=80=9D; it is
> canceled if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
> is the *discussion period*.
>
> Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
> later, possibly under a new GCD number.
>
> ### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
>
> Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed by all the members of the
> community. Authors are encouraged to publish updated versions
> incorporating feedback during the discussion; members are encouraged to
> share a summary of their main concerns or opposition, if any, for being
> included under section =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D in the document.
>
> When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
> of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
> announce the start of the *deliberation period*.
>
> ### Deliberation Period (14 days)
>
> Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Makin=
g=E2=80=9D
> below.
>
> Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
> to contribute to the deliberation.
>
> Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
> one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
>
> - =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal;
> - =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementa=
tion of the
> proposal;
> - =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementa=
tion of the
> proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made
> constructive comments during the discussion period.
>
> The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
> reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
> *withdrawn*.
>
> GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
> the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
> the participants consent to its implementation.
>
> Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it
> could mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in
> the GCD are accepted by the community.
>
> ## Decision Making
>
> Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
> consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions
> that everyone can live with.
>
> Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
> are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
> disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
> proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
>
> To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
> details, you are encouraged to read
> <https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
>
> ## Merging Final GCDs
>
> Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a committer merges the final GCD
> following these steps:
>
> 1. filling in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the
> `status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
> discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
> previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
> `status` header accordingly with `deprecated`);
> 2. committing everything;
> 3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
>
> All the GCDs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
> Attribution-ShareAlike
> 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
> [GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
> Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
> Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html) or (at your option)
> any later version.
>
> ## GCD Template
>
> The expected structure of GCDs is captured by the template in the file
> `000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown syntax.
>
> ## Cost of Reverting
>
> The GCD process described in this document can be amended by subsequent
> GCDs.
>
> ## Drawbacks
>
> There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more=
than
> it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to he=
lp
> contribution, not an end in itself.
>
> Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
> collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices
> and notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon,
> and solicit opinions of those who remained silent.
>
> ## Open Issues
>
> There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
> While we want to ensure that technical changes that affect users are
> well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become un=
duly
> burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to
> maintain moving forward.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 20:41:36 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 15:41:36 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34818 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYWgJ-0003M3-Lj for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 15:41:36 -0500 Received: from mail01.noris.net ([62.128.1.221]:43631) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>) id 1tYWgG-0003Lp-7n for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 15:41:34 -0500 Received: from p57b08759.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([87.176.135.89] helo=hermia.goebel-consult.de) by mail01.noris.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>) id 1tYWgE-0002IL-NC; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 21:41:30 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hermia.goebel-consult.de [192.168.110.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by hermia.goebel-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38405662D8; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 21:41:27 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------LWYrL8cqnRR5FAXpWoJnB1Tz" Message-ID: <d03e9184-f567-4963-85b8-12e93435330c@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 21:41:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. From: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN> To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN> <87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <ec3ea9b4-8792-4f91-b324-e714cc7f0c57@HIDDEN> Content-Language: de-DE, en-US Autocrypt: addr=h.goebel@HIDDEN; keydata= xsFNBFJQM3oBEACiUXmMppc3+A7JpF3lPz8O/mRhfz1U6F4EOTlacTrCcm7Xg5U2JsPPNapV r5+vHnKBK+xbaX3s/A/G+SwrUZhi1X1HRnSNY1CqL8CT7rZmOtfjg4ExnOuCjie2bKhb9JKm lJ7MrNimIbNQoX1mRcQ4VMEflhyWfaPGbT73siuMkbr020ExhzW8T18JIC01SgWMULYMBXOB oGY21am/vaTFCK8bym1P4HVN8i64uOWL0agkAMHbju6SZtG2fYJ68eS3P/97bXRg1pveEdpa FgaFZhquecw4WdedwLwt1xNcjAg/p6tN73W3asEZTgMHa+iNzbJgcyhWpci09wQZfZ1uL0Hd M+ohng38ccgu9hJx6YzCN7Fe14JooKbPukG/WfClAgAzZSHRKpS4zGdGlg6D6EWayyWWoLR3 KoMA4LIIlaQbqaOhfe85b4mNgB1hqd0uRTHOah/6T+FUoSQ1IAeKLIDqj6rW7X4ISRn1CXGS LGDn2QKqR3KtU3cLf8hAeDeO7Qe1jTvLrG1Mfca8lEmC7/yN1gI7L4/cs6lhmXUgMaevuxss BxO2kkh0OS8HVFf+QQ7LZ5vt91yQVT9HVvOuVob0YtG+3rvkpMaHQilKloNoEkmMiHpwypBa IfAC6NP9smgionvvmQ5RWSEaH5/pfSUAYbqzWbqDxtqEF/mPOwARAQABzS1IYXJ0bXV0IEdv ZWJlbCA8aC5nb2ViZWxAY3JhenktY29tcGlsZXJzLmNvbT7CwZQEEwEKAD4CGwMCHgECF4AF CwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQAWIQTUrYucFnt1fE8I6Hd7dSgRv3c7ZQUCZXYHFwUJFwaNHQAK CRB7dSgRv3c7ZV3XD/0TQziqqbblVi+apROMF+nvuoyAhHX0KMAuVAI1Qi+9jJN1oa1xAl2P 5/Kco/WUxKSpuJBXN+riAiMslfBCCUkNO4ZlIXeVRzOZOWoDVJSuQYhu2NXsziD2mAXRTw0k SR5U8uHV98Vpqj8EHMgdQOfASOZpMAPMjcZ2BfBELD5Hp8xcjkMU+TMu1T/Sg22bcFQDSVsI CpGP8JqeAE82vpBjFUEBgriw49kRpccGHz3F37SpCqyLexJP6BvF42Tpa3+0FPciJ5HTPiUf DZfo4ob8ry/AVswjukVcvCVNAMlbH7pVQNrXWq7ObaM1+Fzzc7UpSooDsbZ5A5KjP2T36Kyj IW0wzXQEzk4n5+2m8m3+4TzQPgkGLRs5PfIjb5MAuzAZ25h+1YK8IepynHv/aVQl0FPoNXDn tGKL3g/K8FV3aSjYN+ya4IsCkuyyziUl7WshtHZ+jglYVcBF2xPDjICv+qmWzLLlVabhVvqG IYRL/hiaVgmpzQ+87jIOBsknT8BHExIcQMbf/hjwRau4kFKCpNTT9VMKOf+xcLjjB+wWoM/Y psUcJtikSnwb3fGmGZvMMyAS+wk240pCAZ9y9wXkAEY7qPL/DYjo9yjuU+c5xbn0okf8hSod NRuYgIn+bghxEvku/2Q8FjBvhLY/wefH8Qhz8R9WZ7z3SsXVhs54xc7BTQRSUDN6ARAAveU7 P66Ee50S+i8lV0TGX4xMculhxqMDRAvMNd7SOIBh0H4mm+bsIApqeLrX96jVKcfJE5EQuPGX 98vfK2ODfJG9UAzYj7GDuUgHipcvmtHkryIXinH+NhXYIEiLA4pDqBURWTaGmX+0+o/dB04p d0u7ew4zViCDc83l9z4jsHqW5yHHoG7s0BHudYqfoPU104jVRkvoOvox7/qE1UkEa8MXcWbb HQKgge6MWSx87Fm3ChkxefXc3XxkPJA4wDz14c1CUWuL2LnEbeVowBbYzRujN/4XBMFeiYha RPZOSPeiZbxkhx9qCzZKlGRCXjmkTrmcsorfp5E2g1sGi+opqUzKEqy0VOkiONNlEwjkRnzu PuBhf+CEKyzYtnPhfRZ+8fqVi3xi+O8j1K2XgQ2826RBlJmAilpoCBlx5fK4tqP4VjVxVcrc ChOH6Wit19evdNIHGVvXPtw0eqwj291HCx8L42D7JGs0ac3DTTx+AOr1+Fpm6zWSu09DNPIn MzD3Gcsq4eEcVuQcNpbUZv12cQIEXxpPSSN9+AQ0Rrkrpt/IAYZnnOKQG4r0Rl0hDQqAs/nm F2djs+KBdrNKy9jFUHrb4HSRFjGPIztQBfnn5B4PumQ+EGZGjN41hnNDG71zJ4Pzd7Vh/t12 cGSQtdXJPMoi60aHZHYGRyaRsEpO/bsAEQEAAcLBewQYAQoAJgIbDBYhBNSti5wWe3V8Twjo d3t1KBG/dztlBQJl0zYCBQkXBiA2AAoJEHt1KBG/dztl8SAP9jhSVpxB/3zV+uWhtH7dsihN Imylcs6/v/pn/topMASFAxwwODSTCBfqm/+H9KBL89gwRfBhwVKt2+e2nREMWyyzqWe1H8Ye tng4kEdmcAzT/eeL279Tu0GolFHQSkBZMeAp6qJu+JmFTsDAFhx+X+14mpU2CP352xDF9tDf Gw51b9jIhuKgkB1uukYSDghUTH3rW5+rxuwvNgQ7YDgznyykESfaCUeqVAabA8xKbErKM8G6 PLS93Zu1FJKCr2R2Br2HsI7Yi6g9VTM5Rws1COE0ApJr/GEnebpUh0QcOUiRxtx2LCR4nQI9 Vb6Dky+6aaWz4NsawdLJCym9MxKsGBwV70+xoqOVyA3NNWAZAnPYyEntPWMKTYlwJZDNURqT NSE3TlS3RUpHJ/y7FeSUQ0kVMmpFZjRY671qAvt6Q4uEsnDcz1g06zLnJKQLs9tEg4kCP32w kgMrrtAFQwbWzGTxf3xnjVooEJHHI7vOCzj83BQM4sq2Mp6kyuKjrAM+kLZChg8gd+Koj7fj eUIfwDjLCf3Ax7+g1QEqSqVsYxEB60oLONGMy0V31mofwefbWyFEhf7Mkb3lq01JtJ8TYNIL piWwGAMdoMZO8fXmTslMrRAStK3PpuUV1R3iAiqBHfyGYPQD5snxA4sHmWDSqI4OfUbVVkA6 OY6DWb43/DE= Organization: crazy-compilers.com In-Reply-To: <ec3ea9b4-8792-4f91-b324-e714cc7f0c57@HIDDEN> X-Noris-IP: 87.176.135.89 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 (-) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------LWYrL8cqnRR5FAXpWoJnB1Tz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, enclosed please find a patch for v9. It proposes descriptions for missing states, cases and transitions. I found it easier to create the patch than describing what I propose to change. This patch does *not* include my proposals from my other mails today, but new ones. In addition, I suggest exchanging "Process Overview" and "Roles". I left this away to keep the patch small. -- Regards Hartmut Goebel | Hartmut Goebel | h.goebel@HIDDEN | | www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible | --------------LWYrL8cqnRR5FAXpWoJnB1Tz Content-Type: text/x-patch; charset=UTF-8; name="v9.patch" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="v9.patch" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 LS0tIDAwMS1nY2QtcHJvY2Vzcy12OS5tZAkyMDI1LTAxLTE2IDE5OjA4OjU0LjU5MTUyMDE3 OSArMDEwMAorKysgMDAxLWdjZC1wcm9jZXNzLXY5LWhnLm1kCTIwMjUtMDEtMTYgMjE6MzQ6 NTIuNjM3Nzg3OTAxICswMTAwCkBAIC03MCw3ICs3MCw5IEBACiBUaGVzZSBkYXktdG8tZGF5 IGNvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbnMgcmVtYWluIGdvdmVybmVkIGJ5IHRoZSBwcm9jZXNzIGRlc2NyaWJl ZAogYnkgdGhlIG1hbnVhbCBpbiBpdHMg4oCcQ29udHJpYnV0aW5n4oCdIGNoYXB0ZXIuCiAK LSMjIEhvdyB0aGUgUHJvY2VzcyBXb3JrcworIyBIb3cgdGhlIFByb2Nlc3MgV29ya3MKKwor IyMgR2V0dGluZyBTdGFydGVkCiAKIDEuIENsb25lCiAgICBodHRwczovL2dpdC5zYXZhbm5h aC5nbnUub3JnL2dpdC9ndWl4L2d1aXgtY29uc2Vuc3VzLWRvY3VtZW50cy5naXQKQEAgLTg1 LDEwICs4Nyw4IEBACiAgICBvbmUgb3IgbW9yZSBwZW9wbGUgd2hvIHdpbGwgc3VwcG9ydCB0 aGUgR0NEIGFuZCBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0ZSBpbgogICAgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbnMgYnkgeW91ciBzaWRl IChzZWUgYmVsb3cpLgogCi1UaGUgR0NEIGlzICpzdWJtaXR0ZWQqIG9uY2UgaXQgaGFzIGF0 IGxlYXN0IG9uZSBzcG9uc29yIGluIGFkZGl0aW9uIHRvCi10aGUgYXV0aG9yKHMpLiAgU2Vl IOKAnFN1Ym1pc3Npb24gUGVyaW9k4oCdIGJlbG93LgotCi1TdWJtaXR0ZWQgR0NEIGlzIGFu bm91bmNlZCBhdCBgaW5mby1ndWl4QGdudS5vcmdgLgorWW91ciBHQ0QgaXMgbm93IGluICJk cmFmdCIgc3RhdGUgYW5kIHdpbGwgYmUgcHJvY2Vzc2VkIGFzIGRlc2NyaWJlZCBpbgordGhl IG5leHQgc2VjdGlvbnMuCiAKICMjIFJvbGVzCiAKQEAgLTExNiw3ICsxMTYsNyBAQAogICAg IHRyYW5zbGF0aW9uLCByZXZpZXdpbmcsIGV0Yy4gYW5kIG1vcmUgYnJvYWRseSBhbnkgcGVy c29uIGZlZWxpbmcgcGFydAogICAgIG9mIHRoZSBHdWl4IGNvbW11bml0eS4KIAotIyMgVGlt ZWxpbmUKKyMjIFByb2Nlc3MgT3ZlcnZpZXcKIAogQSBHQ0QgbXVzdCBmb2xsb3cgdGhlIHBy b2Nlc3MgaWxsdXN0cmF0ZWQgYnkgdGhlIGRpYWdyYW0gYmVsb3csCiBjb25zaXN0aW5nIG9m IHNldmVyYWwgKnBlcmlvZHMqLgpAQCAtMTQxLDE4ICsxNDEsMzYgQEAKIAogVGhlIHN1YnNl Y3Rpb25zIGJlbG93IGRldGFpbCB0aGUgdmFyaW91cyBwZXJpb2RzIGFuZCB0aGVpciBkdXJh dGlvbi4KIAotIyMjIFN1Ym1pc3Npb24gUGVyaW9kICh1cCB0byA3IGRheXMpCisjIyBTdWJt aXNzaW9uIFBlcmlvZCAodXAgdG8gNyBkYXlzKQorCitEdXJpbmcgdGhlIFN1Ym1pc3Npb24g UGVyaW9kIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIHNlZWsgYXQgbGVhc3Qgb25lIHNwb25zb3IKKyhzZWUgYmVs b3cpIGZvciB0aGVpciAqZHJhZnQqIEdDRCBpbiBhZGRpdGlvbiB0byB0aGUgYXV0aG9yKHMp LgorQ29udHJpYnV0b3JzIGNhbiB2b2x1bnRlZXIgdG8gYmUgc3BvbnNvcnMgYnkgcHVibGlj bHkgcmVwbHlpbmcg4oCcSQorc3BvbnNvcuKAnSB0byB0aGUgYXV0aG9ycycgYW5ub3VuY2Vt ZW50LgogCi1BbnlvbmUgY2FuIGF1dGhvciBhbmQgc3VibWl0IGEgR0NEIGFzIGEgcmVndWxh ciBwYXRjaCBhbmQgbG9vayBmb3IKLXNwb25zb3JzIChzZWUgYmVsb3cpLiAgVGhlIEdDRCBp cyAqc3VibWl0dGVkKiBvbmNlIG9uZSBvciBtb3JlIHBlb3BsZQotaGF2ZSB2b2x1bnRlZXJl ZCB0byBiZSBzcG9uc29ycyBieSBwdWJsaWNseSByZXBseWluZyDigJxJIHNwb25zb3LigJ07 IGl0IGlzCi1jYW5jZWxlZCBpZiBubyBzcG9uc29yIGNvdWxkIGJlIGZvdW5kIGR1cmluZyB0 aGF0IHBlcmlvZC4gIFRoZSBuZXh0IHN0ZXAKLWlzIHRoZSAqZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBwZXJpb2Qq LgorT25jZSBvbmUgb3IgbW9yZSBzcG9uc29ycyBhcmUgZm91bmQsIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIGNh biAqc3VibWl0KiB0aGUgR0NECisoc2VlIGJlbG93KSBhbmQgc3RhcnQgdGhlICpkaXNjdXNz aW9uIHBlcmlvZCouCisKK1RoZSBHQ0QgaXMgKmNhbmNlbGVkKiBpZiBubyBzcG9uc29yIGNv dWxkIGJlIGZvdW5kIGR1cmluZyB0aGF0IHBlcmlvZC4KIAogQXV0aG9ycyBtYXkgd2l0aGRy YXcgdGhlaXIgR0NEIGF0IGFueSB0aW1lOyB0aGV5IGNhbiByZXN1Ym1pdCBpdCBhZ2Fpbgog bGF0ZXIsIHBvc3NpYmx5IHVuZGVyIGEgbmV3IEdDRCBudW1iZXIuCiAKLSMjIyBEaXNjdXNz aW9uIFBlcmlvZCAoYXQgbGVhc3QgMzAgZGF5cywgdXAgdG8gNjAgZGF5cykKKyMjIyBTdWJt aXR0aW5nIHRoZSBHQ0QKKworW1tTb21lIGV4cGxhbmF0aW9uIGxpa2UgIk1lcmdpbmcgdGhl IEZpbmFsIEdDRCIuCitQbHVzIGhhbmRsaW5nIHRoZSBjYXNlIHRoYXQgdGhlIGF1dGhvciBk aXNhcHBlYXJzOl1dCisKK1RoZSAqZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBwZXJpb2QqIHNoYWxsIGJlIHN0YXJ0 ZWQgd2l0aGluIDcgZGF5cyBhZnRlcgorc3VibWlzc2lvbi4gIEFmdGVyIHRoYXQsIHRoZSBz dGFsZSBHQ0QgbWF5IGJlIHNldCB0byAqd2l0aGRyYXduKiBieSBhCitNYWludGFpbmVyIG9m IHRoZSBHdWl4IHByb2plY3QuCisKKworIyMgRGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBQZXJpb2QgKGF0IGxlYXN0 IDMwIGRheXMsIHVwIHRvIDYwIGRheXMpCisKK1RoZSAqZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBwZXJpb2QqIHN0 YXJ0cyB3aGVuIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzCithbm5vdW5jZSB0aGUgc3VibWlzc2lvbiBvZiB0aGUg R0NEIGF0IGJvdGggYGluZm8tZ3VpeEBnbnUub3JnYAorYW5kIGBndWl4LWRldmVsQGdudS5v cmdgLgogCiBPbmNlIHN1Ym1pdHRlZCwgdGhlIEdDRCBpcyBwdWJsaWNseSBkaXNjdXNzZWQg YnkgYWxsIHRoZSBtZW1iZXJzIG9mIHRoZQogY29tbXVuaXR5LiAgQXV0aG9ycyBhcmUgZW5j b3VyYWdlZCB0byBwdWJsaXNoIHVwZGF0ZWQgdmVyc2lvbnMKQEAgLTE2NCw3ICsxODIsMTQg QEAKIG9mIHRoZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIHBlcmlvZCwgdGhlIGF1dGhvcihzKSBtYXkgcHVibGlz aCBhIGZpbmFsIHZlcnNpb24gYW5kCiBhbm5vdW5jZSB0aGUgc3RhcnQgb2YgdGhlICpkZWxp YmVyYXRpb24gcGVyaW9kKi4KIAotIyMjIERlbGliZXJhdGlvbiBQZXJpb2QgKDE0IGRheXMp CitUaGUgKmRlbGliZXJhdGlvbiBwZXJpb2QqIHNoYWxsIGJlIHN0YXJ0ZWQgd2l0aGluIDcg ZGF5cyBhZnRlciB0aGUgZW5kCitvZiB0aGUgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBwZXJpb2QuICBBZnRlciB0 aGF0LCB0aGUgc3RhbGUgR0NEIG1heSBiZSBzZXQgdG8KKyp3aXRoZHJhd24qIGJ5IGEgTWFp bnRhaW5lciBvZiB0aGUgR3VpeCBwcm9qZWN0LgorCisjIyBEZWxpYmVyYXRpb24gUGVyaW9k ICgxNCBkYXlzKQorCitUaGUgKmRlbGliZXJhdGlvbiBwZXJpb2QqIHN0YXJ0cyB3aGVuIHRo ZSBhdXRob3JzCitwdWJsaXNoIGEgZmluYWwgdmVyc2lvbiBvZiB0aGUgR0NEIGF0IGBndWl4 LWRldmVsQGdudS5vcmdgLgogCiBEZWxpYmVyYXRpb24gYWltcyBhdCBjb25zb2xpZGF0aW5n IGNvbnNlbnN1czsgc2VlIOKAnERlY2lzaW9uIE1ha2luZ+KAnQogYmVsb3cuCkBAIC0yMzAs MTcgKzI1NSwxOSBAQAogVGV4dHNdKGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmdudS5vcmcvbGljZW5zZXMvZmRs LTEuMy5odG1sKSBvciAoYXQgeW91ciBvcHRpb24pCiBhbnkgbGF0ZXIgdmVyc2lvbi4KIAot IyMgR0NEIFRlbXBsYXRlCisjIFJlbGF0ZWQgRG9jdW1lbnRzCisKKyogKipHQ0QgVGVtcGxh dGUqKjoKIAogVGhlIGV4cGVjdGVkIHN0cnVjdHVyZSBvZiBHQ0RzIGlzIGNhcHR1cmVkIGJ5 IHRoZSB0ZW1wbGF0ZSBpbiB0aGUgZmlsZQogYDAwMC10ZW1wbGF0ZS5tZGAsIHdyaXR0ZW4g aW4gRW5nbGlzaCB3aXRoIE1hcmtkb3duIHN5bnRheC4KIAotIyMgQ29zdCBvZiBSZXZlcnRp bmcKKyMgQ29zdCBvZiBSZXZlcnRpbmcKIAogVGhlIEdDRCBwcm9jZXNzIGRlc2NyaWJlZCBp biB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGNhbiBiZSBhbWVuZGVkIGJ5IHN1YnNlcXVlbnQKIEdDRHMuCiAK LSMjIERyYXdiYWNrcworIyBEcmF3YmFja3MKIAogVGhlcmUgaXMgYSByaXNrIHRoYXQgdGhl IGFkZGl0aW9uYWwgcHJvY2VzcyB3aWxsIGhpbmRlciBjb250cmlidXRpb24gbW9yZSB0aGFu CiBpdCB3b3VsZCBoZWxwLiAgV2Ugc2hvdWxkIHN0YXkgYWxlcnQgdGhhdCB0aGUgcHJvY2Vz cyBpcyBvbmx5IGEgd2F5IHRvIGhlbHAKQEAgLTI1MSw3ICsyNzgsNyBAQAogYW5kIG5vdGFi bHkgYXZvaWQgcmVwZWF0aW5nIGFyZ3VtZW50cywgYXZvaWQgdXNpbmcgZXhjbHVzaW9uYXJ5 IGphcmdvbiwKIGFuZCBzb2xpY2l0IG9waW5pb25zIG9mIHRob3NlIHdobyByZW1haW5lZCBz aWxlbnQuCiAKLSMjIE9wZW4gSXNzdWVzCisjIE9wZW4gSXNzdWVzCiAKIFRoZXJlIGFyZSBz dGlsbCBxdWVzdGlvbnMgcmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSBkZXNpcmVkIHNjb3BlIG9mIHRoZSBwcm9j ZXNzLgogV2hpbGUgd2Ugd2FudCB0byBlbnN1cmUgdGhhdCB0ZWNobmljYWwgY2hhbmdlcyB0 aGF0IGFmZmVjdCB1c2VycyBhcmUK --------------LWYrL8cqnRR5FAXpWoJnB1Tz--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 19:50:48 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 14:50:48 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34743 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYVt9-0006YU-NH
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 14:50:48 -0500
Received: from mail02.noris.net ([62.128.1.232]:41389)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYVt6-0006YJ-5r
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 14:50:46 -0500
Received: from p57b08759.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([87.176.135.89]
helo=hermia.goebel-consult.de)
by mail02.noris.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYVt4-00032g-Pd; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:50:42 +0100
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hermia.goebel-consult.de [192.168.110.7])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by hermia.goebel-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 024CD662D8;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:50:38 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------Ml0MwRFf92D39w0Thb1IlsKR"
Message-ID: <54393837-c762-4eb2-a3fb-0d566583b88d@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:50:34 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] Re v8 of Add Request-For-Comment process.
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN>
<87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>
Content-Language: de-DE, en-US
Autocrypt: addr=h.goebel@HIDDEN; keydata=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Organization: crazy-compilers.com
In-Reply-To: <87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN>
X-Noris-IP: 87.176.135.89
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
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 (-)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------Ml0MwRFf92D39w0Thb1IlsKR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi,
tanks for the updated version.
> On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 at 16:57, Hartmut Goebel<h.goebel@HIDDEN> wrote:
>
>> Section "How the Process Works", number 2: Is –sequence number obvious
>> enough? If the GCD is not pushed to the repo right after creating,
>> other authors need to look at the patches-mailinglist.
> The “sequence number“ of GCD is incremented once the proposal is
> ‘Submitted’.
The current text does not state this. Rather it implies, the sequence
number is to be picked when creating the draft ("How the Process Works",
number 2). So if two persons draft a GCD at nearly the same time, how to
prevent both are picking the same number? (See proposal below.)
It also came to my mind, that the text does not explain who is pushing
the patch to the GCD repo and when (at which point in the process).
Proposed text:
At the end of section "Submission Period":
If the proposal is "submitted", the author updates the sequence
number and the state in the patch, applies the patch and pushes the
change to the main branch of the GCD repo. The commit message should
read "Submit GCD XYZ: Short Title". See "Merging The (final) GCD)".
— The next step is the *discussion period*.
If the proposal is "canceled" or "withdrawn", the author closes the
"guix-patches" issue and nothing is pushed to the GCD repo. The
process ends here.
> The complete sentence reads: « The GCD must not be prospective; it must
> formalize an idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even if not all
> details are known. ». Because the GCD must not be a brainstorming
> session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal.
>
> Well, I am not native and ‘prospective’ sounds close to French. :-)
I'm not native either and I simply don't understand the meaning of "not
be prospective" - even in conjunction with the remaining part. I suggest
to either use a different less eloquent wording, rephrase it like you
did, or as a last resort, remove this phrase.
Also for me "formalize" sounds like the wrong term, as it translates to
"write a [math, chemistry, etc.] formula", "make official" or "fix in a
contract". Anyhow, this is what shall be expressed?
Proposal:
The GCD must describe a concrete idea and sketch a plan to implement
it, even if not all details are known. The GCD must not be a
brainstorming session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal.
>> Section "How the Process Works", number 4: It should be states
>> explicitly that the patch is for/against guix-consensus-documents.
> I’m not sure to get the comment. Is it not clear with
>
> 1. Clone https://…/guix-consensus-documents.git
It was not oblivious to me. This is why I'd rather state i explicitly.
>> Section "Timelime", Flowshart: Some kind of "declined" is missing.
> Updated.
"Canceled" is the term used in "Submission Period". Sorry for the confusion.
>
>> Section "Submission Period": withdraw and can resubmit "possibly under
>> a new GCD number". Why possibly? What are the rules whether a new
>> number has to be used?
> Once the GCD is “Submitted”, it ends with the state either “Accepted” or
> “Widthdrawn”. Therefore, if a “Submitted” GCD is “Widthdrawn”, then a
> new “Submission” gets a new number (if the new becomes “Submitted”).
>
> That’s the idea.
Thus the word "possibly" (translates to "maybe", "perhaps"), has to be
removed from the sentence, right?
>> Section "Discussion Period": Can the period be extended? What happens
>> if there is still heavy discussion aber 60 days?
> IMHO, it’s better if we keep a bounded period. Somehow, if after 60
> days we are not able to have a consensus, it means the idea is not ready
> yet. Based on this output, nothing prevent to resubmit later once new
> and a fresh point of view comes in.
In <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/74736#58> Ludo wrote: "It has to
be at most 60 days, I think that’s quite clear."
Either way, this need to be stated more explicit.
>> Section "Deliberate period": "GCD acceptence" and "withdrawal does not
>> necessarily" should go out of this section into as more general
>> part. Mayby into "Decision Making" (see my next point on this).
> I do not know…
>
>> Section "Deliberate period": IMHO if a vast number of team members
>> disapprove the proposal it should be taken as rejected.
> There is no formal distinction between ’withdrawn’ because the author
> decides to do so or because the consensus leads to a disparagement.
>
> Maybe we could introduce that have four potential states for the GCD
> (accepted or deprecated, rejected, withdrawn).
Rethinking this: Since we are seeking consensus, it does not actually
matter whether the GCD was rejected or withdrawn.
And some new points:
Section "Merging Final GCDs" puts the burden of updating the meta-date
and announcing to a committer. Agreed that the author might not have
commit permissions to the GCD repo. Anyhow many might abstain from
committing it there in this case :-)
Section "Merging Final GCDs" uses "committer" in terms of "has commit
permissions to the GCD repo" – which is different from teh definition in
roles. Thus a different or more specific term should be used here.
--
Regards
Hartmut Goebel
| Hartmut Goebel |h.goebel@HIDDEN |
|www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |
--------------Ml0MwRFf92D39w0Thb1IlsKR
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi,</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">tanks for the updated version.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 at 16:57, Hartmut Goebel <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:h.goebel@HIDDEN"><h.goebel@HIDDEN></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Section "How the Process Works", number 2: Is –sequence number obvious
enough? If the GCD is not pushed to the repo right after creating,
other authors need to look at the patches-mailinglist.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
The “sequence number“ of GCD is incremented once the proposal is
‘Submitted’.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>The current text does not state this. Rather it implies, the
sequence number is to be picked when creating the draft (<span
style="white-space: pre-wrap">"How the Process Works", number 2). So if two persons draft a GCD at nearly the same time, how to prevent both are picking the same number? (See proposal below.)</span></p>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">It also came to my mind, that the text does not explain who is pushing the patch to the GCD repo and when (at which point in the process). Proposed text:
</span></p>
<blockquote>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">At the end of section "Submission Period":
</span></p>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">If the proposal is "submitted", the author updates the sequence number and the state in the patch, applies the patch and pushes the change to the main branch of the GCD repo. The commit message should read "Submit GCD XYZ: Short Title". See "Merging The (final) GCD)". — The next step is the *discussion period*.</span></p>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">If the proposal is "canceled" or "withdrawn", the author closes the "guix-patches" issue and nothing is pushed to the GCD repo. The process ends here.
</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span></p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">The complete sentence reads: « The GCD must not be prospective; it must
formalize an idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even if not all
details are known. ». Because the GCD must not be a brainstorming
session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal.
Well, I am not native and ‘prospective’ sounds close to French. :-)</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I'm not native either and I simply don't understand the meaning
of "not be prospective" - even in conjunction with the remaining
part. I suggest to either use a different less eloquent wording,
rephrase it like you did, or as a last resort, remove this phrase.</p>
<p>Also for me "formalize" sounds like the wrong term, as it
translates to "write a [math, chemistry, etc.] formula", "make
official" or "fix in a contract". Anyhow, this is what shall be
expressed?<br>
</p>
<p>Proposal:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The GCD must describe a concrete idea and sketch a plan to
implement it, even if not all details are known. The GCD must
not <span style="white-space: pre-wrap">be a brainstorming </span><span
style="white-space: pre-wrap">session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Section "How the Process Works", number 4: It should be states
explicitly that the patch is for/against guix-consensus-documents.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
I’m not sure to get the comment. Is it not clear with
1. Clone https://…/guix-consensus-documents.git </pre>
</blockquote>
<p>It was not oblivious to me. This is why I'd rather state i
explicitly.<br>
</p>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span></p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Section "Timelime", Flowshart: Some kind of "declined" is missing.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
Updated.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>"Canceled" is the term used in "Submission Period". Sorry for the
confusion.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Section "Submission Period": withdraw and can resubmit "possibly under
a new GCD number". Why possibly? What are the rules whether a new
number has to be used?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
Once the GCD is “Submitted”, it ends with the state either “Accepted” or
“Widthdrawn”. Therefore, if a “Submitted” GCD is “Widthdrawn”, then a
new “Submission” gets a new number (if the new becomes “Submitted”).
That’s the idea.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>Thus the word "possibly" (translates to "maybe", "perhaps"), has
to be removed from the sentence, right?<span
style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span></p>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span></p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Section "Discussion Period": Can the period be extended? What happens
if there is still heavy discussion aber 60 days?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
IMHO, it’s better if we keep a bounded period. Somehow, if after 60
days we are not able to have a consensus, it means the idea is not ready
yet. Based on this output, nothing prevent to resubmit later once new
and a fresh point of view comes in.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>In <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/74736#58"><https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/74736#58></a> Ludo wrote:
"<span style="white-space: pre-wrap">It has to be at most 60 days, I think that’s quite clear."</span></p>
<p>Either way, this need to be stated more explicit.</p>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span></p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87frlislgg.fsf@HIDDEN">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Section "Deliberate period": "GCD acceptence" and "withdrawal does not
necessarily" should go out of this section into as more general
part. Mayby into "Decision Making" (see my next point on this).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
I do not know…
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Section "Deliberate period": IMHO if a vast number of team members
disapprove the proposal it should be taken as rejected.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
There is no formal distinction between ’withdrawn’ because the author
decides to do so or because the consensus leads to a disparagement.
Maybe we could introduce that have four potential states for the GCD
(accepted or deprecated, rejected, withdrawn).
</pre>
</blockquote>
Rethinking this: Since we are seeking consensus, it does not
actually matter whether the GCD was rejected or withdrawn. <br>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span></p>
<p>And some new points:</p>
<p>Section "Merging Final GCDs" puts the burden of updating the
meta-date and announcing to a committer. Agreed that the author
might not have commit permissions to the GCD repo. Anyhow many
might abstain from committing it there in this case :-)</p>
<p>Section "Merging Final GCDs" uses "committer" in terms of "has
commit permissions to the GCD repo" – which is different from teh
definition in roles. Thus a different or more specific term should
be used here.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Regards
Hartmut Goebel
| Hartmut Goebel | <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:h.goebel@HIDDEN">h.goebel@HIDDEN</a> |
| <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.crazy-compilers.com">www.crazy-compilers.com</a> | compilers which you thought are impossible |
</pre>
</body>
</html>
--------------Ml0MwRFf92D39w0Thb1IlsKR--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 19:43:51 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 14:43:51 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34733 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYVmQ-0006CI-To
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 14:43:51 -0500
Received: from mail01.noris.net ([62.128.1.221]:47035)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYVmL-0006C3-Rg
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 14:43:48 -0500
Received: from p57b08759.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([87.176.135.89]
helo=hermia.goebel-consult.de)
by mail01.noris.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYVmK-0007KQ-4i; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:43:44 +0100
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hermia.goebel-consult.de [192.168.110.7])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by hermia.goebel-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4CF6662D8;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:43:40 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------pUjHGuH0vPDyWTJaxiqHjX4l"
Message-ID: <ec3ea9b4-8792-4f91-b324-e714cc7f0c57@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:43:40 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN>
<87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
From: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>
Content-Language: de-DE, en-US
Autocrypt: addr=h.goebel@HIDDEN; keydata=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Organization: crazy-compilers.com
In-Reply-To: <87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
X-Noris-IP: 87.176.135.89
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
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 (-)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------pUjHGuH0vPDyWTJaxiqHjX4l
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi Ludo,
Am 13.01.25 um 22:17 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
> Hartmut Goebel<h.goebel@HIDDEN> skribis:
>
>
>> Section "Deliberate period": IMHO "deliberation" is the wrong term, since the team members send in their votes. I suggest calling it "Voting
>> Period", even if someone might argue that in consent based decision making, "deliberation" is the term to use.
> I proposed “Voting Period” but we eventually considered that
> “Deliberation Period” would better represent what this is.
After reading <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/74736#70> I now
understood that the base idea behind decision making is "Consensus".
This is mentioned in "motivation", but rather like a side note than as
an important principle.
Therefore I propose moving the section "Decision Making" into
"Motivation" – or make it a top-level section just below "Motivation".
>> Section "Deliberate period":The 25% are to be counted at which valuation date? I propose:
> You propose what? :-)
:-)
"… 25% of all team members – as of the start of the Deliberation Period – …"
--
Regards
Hartmut Goebel
| Hartmut Goebel |h.goebel@HIDDEN |
|www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |
--------------pUjHGuH0vPDyWTJaxiqHjX4l
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Ludo,</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 13.01.25 um 22:17 schrieb Ludovic
Courtès:</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@HIDDEN">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Hartmut Goebel <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:h.goebel@HIDDEN"><h.goebel@HIDDEN></a> skribis:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Section "Deliberate period": IMHO "deliberation" is the wrong term, since the team members send in their votes. I suggest calling it "Voting
Period", even if someone might argue that in consent based decision making, "deliberation" is the term to use.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
I proposed “Voting Period” but we eventually considered that
“Deliberation Period” would better represent what this is.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>After reading <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/74736#70"><https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/74736#70></a>
I now understood that the base idea behind decision making is
"Consensus". This is mentioned in "motivation", but rather like a
side note than as an important principle.<br>
</p>
<p>Therefore I propose moving the section "Decision Making" into
"Motivation" – or make it a top-level section just below
"Motivation".<br>
</p>
<p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span></p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@HIDDEN">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">Section "Deliberate period":The 25% are to be counted at which valuation date? I propose:
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
You propose what? :-)</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>:-)<br>
</p>
<p>"… 25% of all team members – as of the start of the Deliberation
Period – …"<br>
</p>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Regards
Hartmut Goebel
| Hartmut Goebel | <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:h.goebel@HIDDEN">h.goebel@HIDDEN</a> |
| <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.crazy-compilers.com">www.crazy-compilers.com</a> | compilers which you thought are impossible |
</pre>
</body>
</html>
--------------pUjHGuH0vPDyWTJaxiqHjX4l--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 18:02:27 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 13:02:27 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34589 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYUCI-0001ek-Tt
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 13:02:27 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::336]:59745)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYUCD-0001dy-8b
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 13:02:21 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-436281c8a38so8270355e9.3
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737050535; x=1737655335; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=SP+3NVpyu1QEfpnh6Dpp6e/jOWR+L4e8EExQC9aXPCE=;
b=Ee6B/nFUZxJ3AzdUSG3olgIVUzM4kudo+iH7Mhl64/FFlUEa9eEQtDgMe8YuCjQ09f
t2bc6q8RYCtYHRXpNlvLSIDh24p89MY8FYoG0bqD1UFEBmkyEpEmGBNQEBiDcmuSjsm0
aCjtHJItX9b2kY7Vd3j1GsawQc0UCaKEm0rA50kcWm/uRc6x5lsVy+Dff+xAfMO2iDVJ
4l8IkuMeiC03Y2lMNTW3rEKGPeTnEVLWkU9JYPIWF+t9RBvo1pgal0FR6sMUwfLMCRce
lljALC8vHFuqmDzAi1HoAVnewOwExRB2HTUO0b1GJfnQ7lvu9T0z7FhxgXv1Evt6A+2m
bnLg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737050535; x=1737655335;
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=SP+3NVpyu1QEfpnh6Dpp6e/jOWR+L4e8EExQC9aXPCE=;
b=prTq5H4basI9uc6YWzb5RUVC9k5aSJLz4txKCop13fqS6s2uvJ+zUKvbgTZs6mDVt8
srHg8uxfTynO6ttuypF4pKpB6uqmfURarCLn+I7TO13z3iT1XyHjyiWt67+8fGsCqdM7
Utc3qCwm5QkRFDNe2lF15zXmeMFty/UIeKv0IEO3IwlA6D9dpm2H1lmX2yhpvJCUFLQO
+No0PX8/ZqXCoZ3lM4UCKMrhUAbia/k0oF4AS7QyuxFNBbvAXpPBWXY3iRk42uDczZaC
o2xEBXF4u0n9cluBKFHvl5tTHTa+9h+CD7Ct3pYPZtivAdjaUC0nf7cosr6xm9JDahUZ
Yi3Q==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCVD9OlWLxjLTt+XxgXBkl1Ootf5TUKStL3QPYv/icv7QU8iZ6g6R2jqh6Ad52sIe2SicazRYg==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzpsEbCOdGtQcJ6DZl+UsDDYF6hg0i6sEwChuHDFkgd8mtKkFue
kHPGddz7FuQgdLOOj3hQWgKuNO/b1BkBmw3NWADVPLE7WWyJdh3j
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvX+brLoKE/1HahjgBxQ8/jq4JAU+rgVeOSi3BPPccrDUeSk7/tqe6UcgbhWg/
lzWC5Tx64Vpru3JB/D1C6E+AN4+w8Ddihjzl54HF3gQu7LknJzdvQmCrfBo/nawxUP+NQAdX682
kzw4HX1zLJ2HvNKc+LSGHAELWqDXwIgRzL/Lqgkfkx5UfztA3RFEBPj2XKiDWXI0SN9N52eTPx9
5tpt9w981/jSfH8MhHNcMWlxmIr2zG7ds1i14+rGnH67WI2xfGazbpx7mU9eEIUIp4ZJoUj8zLq
NhXG78VWXMpNscx8stnEJBfEZmcRjkWHfmmLilXUpg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHkJkJf0toXbzJkCunTR6hT6nR6GB72GwaCrt0nRJpnw383zT5CBplkl3sJUJH+lzJCLUdQ4Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5f95:0:b0:38a:88e2:e703 with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a88e2e75cmr27008222f8f.13.1737050534805;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-46.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr.
[194.254.61.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
ffacd0b85a97d-38bf3215099sm462867f8f.3.2025.01.16.10.02.13
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:14 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge
<andreas@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <874j1y3fkr.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN>
<Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> <874j1y3fkr.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:01:38 +0100
Message-ID: <87zfjqr62l.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: 74736
Cc: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@HIDDEN>, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN,
mail@HIDDEN, efraim@HIDDEN, rekado@HIDDEN,
guix-devel@HIDDEN, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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 Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 17:10, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote:
>> Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including=20
>> when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists
>> on disapproving?
>
> This is a general question about consensus building.
I agree.
> Perhaps the =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D section could stress that, =
with a
> paragraph above =E2=80=9CTo learn =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D along these lines:
>
> Consensus building requires that participants share a common goal,
> trust each other to act in good faith, listen to one another=E2=80=99s
> concerns to take them into account, and are committed to donating
> enough of their time to achieve it.
To me, this paragraph would be redundant with this other paragraph:
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these conce=
rns
are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating me=
mber
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternat=
ives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status=
quo.
> A deliberating member who =E2=80=9Cinsists on disapproving=E2=80=9D, with=
out proposing
> alternative paths, wouldn=E2=80=99t meet these requirements.
Yes and I think that already included in the paragraph above, no?
> I believe right now people who become team members or committers have
> already demonstrated these abilities. I think this is where these
> expectations should be clarified and agreed upon.
It=E2=80=99s also my point of view.
As we clarified over the time the expectations for Committers, Reviewing
the work of others, etc. I think we need another GCD in order to
document these expectations.
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 18:02:27 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 13:02:26 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34587 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYUCI-0001eh-CH for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 13:02:26 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]:58855) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tYUC8-0001db-Rp for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 13:02:17 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4362bae4d7dso8329215e9.1 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737050531; x=1737655331; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=M+1cOJjjogLQunusDhHjGsvK/SR/Sfm3peuqi0wisHY=; b=MFPcPF6tBEsViYIQMwOUXvbRx/X5N4cyAdvuFRH6w5xLnzKLvphRofkKxH6QvQY1rb Y7aFTQtkuLESI0r9vE/+PQWM1sIUgWAqQloX5uS5HrdP56IOBO1cqDtGBh0NyEomHrXc yzxc1ScTJPIFZ3ClMCuH0pwnQ6tCzc2Y9fgCPOW516mIbUZtOVOH9wkfure+NbRhjsgB 2VQosCaqeG9LwBHw+APrh8ECdTHxKNM68fcvaSQLfz6UiLuT8ffBnvuBjWnQtV/Ry0on hU4+b196SHDW1kazM3HPDkf2/Elj9uMLJJQTwcQ9RuM6bvChZ3eL354iXWwNW1AsVKEk ZmUg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737050531; x=1737655331; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=M+1cOJjjogLQunusDhHjGsvK/SR/Sfm3peuqi0wisHY=; b=hAqnS2RrqNW3hNYo38N8Ox7+qys4j9VGoaossloZ9h3/TVbiAcggAiYSxXHiKXvbwG 4PCGdRu0WaP2VzdQHunmbGakm+e7LNcsQi6ff6zFSxryIqFdDvoUt6HxxLb3/6/tIsKy IVugER4qGkN0vOBy+b/keD2vJK87/jYk0fQw7kJd67+tkrl4+6sauKHVBIjNPCVcc8wA zE5DZDfyZNXNmzwLtd2zM/5dRYKVZRWxL2DhXXFOTv0AUIqfJy7/1zClXtzRq5eCrPJi oKAPc9anQnDaq0b18fVTx+pn1wAJFjF3PE+2viuY3tcLUq+EynbyUFPUld0Ic0bTjnOr gGYg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU1hEY6Nxivun8JSbfp85JjsuM6zZaApPCPlCgY6E2NvYqX/b/DypB4c1L/pp96cPBOQ2LzoQ==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxd/5OP6MFD0GE/eRUWkI0Q/Ze/T53hWriZc96iLM3mdYjWm9g8 pXU2B/IGjh6lFGg60Q+fdbTLhBGvElEmmf8nMxLKJHDLr8cEorOFuM3ICw== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsVhSnORKUMc2VeHo4Rh0wKCIuHM/pYBj1qiRgPKcIJCWpkU3p88a2cNh4UquI BE/abFDVNVfiidFn3D5Cr18+T6+bINmLsr68CEdXmWVz96Vdjzz2qsXndoVhn9GJxfeUKK/bPfH Se3F/fqYLFlPLr+nlq4qY6RzHkcWNxxgycW4UEd/BQ7vNVgiGzk0Pnh99fBknZ8UWJ8kPldkmJn kCtxJPinqMRfn1HY7QwxiDmH9eua706woFniEt0kPKrbPMZWQw/Ee3tubHEmV43vwvQGK8y8AZQ QzUPAcSaRZx4d+vF34bo4tfAhaiVSd0rRsIwEa75Fw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHPRI//F4bawCXRTVAXB4rcXp4lGmuEM/AQHyWpANmz5fsXGKTj+oqxwXAr02RZu1bEntMQ9A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:198c:b0:435:306:e5dd with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e26f47e0mr284602795e9.22.1737050530264; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-40.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr. [194.254.61.40]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38bf3221b65sm474563f8f.33.2025.01.16.10.02.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:09 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [bug#74736] Re v8 of Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 18:43:59 +0100 Message-ID: <87frlislgg.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: 74736 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, Thanks for your comments. On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 at 16:57, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>= wrote: > Section "How the Process Works", number 2: Is =E2=80=93sequence number ob= vious > enough? If the GCD is not pushed to the repo right after creating, > other authors need to look at the patches-mailinglist. The =E2=80=9Csequence number=E2=80=9C of GCD is incremented once the propos= al is =E2=80=98Submitted=E2=80=99. Once =E2=80=99Submitted=E2=80=99, the GCD pro= cess ends with two potential states: accepted or withdrawn. > Section "How the Process Works", number 3: I don't understand "must > not be prospective". According to dict.leo.org, "prospective" > translates in German to adjectives like long-sighted put also to in > the future, estimated, likley. The complete sentence reads: =C2=AB The GCD must not be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to implement it, even if not all details are known. =C2=BB. Because the GCD must not be a brainstorming session or a vague idea but a concrete proposal. Well, I am not native and =E2=80=98prospective=E2=80=99 sounds close to Fre= nch. :-) Maybe native speaker might say whether that=E2=80=99s the correct term for = the idea behind. > Section "How the Process Works", number 4: It should be states > explicitly that the patch is for/against guix-consensus-documents. I=E2=80=99m not sure to get the comment. Is it not clear with 1. Clone https://=E2=80=A6/guix-consensus-documents.git=20 ? > Section "Roles", Sponsor: "is a contributor" and "should be a > contributor". Contributor to the GCD or to Guix? What makes one a > "contributor"? Is the term defined somewhere else, e.g. in the Guix > Manual? Indeed, thanks. > Section "Timelime", Flowshart: Some kind of "declined" is missing. Updated. > Section "Submission Period": withdraw and can resubmit "possibly under > a new GCD number". Why possibly? What are the rules whether a new > number has to be used? Once the GCD is =E2=80=9CSubmitted=E2=80=9D, it ends with the state either = =E2=80=9CAccepted=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9CWidthdrawn=E2=80=9D. Therefore, if a =E2=80=9CSubmitted=E2=80=9D = GCD is =E2=80=9CWidthdrawn=E2=80=9D, then a new =E2=80=9CSubmission=E2=80=9D gets a new number (if the new becomes =E2= =80=9CSubmitted=E2=80=9D). That=E2=80=99s the idea. > Section "Submission Period", Withdrawal and Resubmit: Are there any > rules why or when an author may resubmit the GCD? Is feedback like > "The idea is good, but a lot of things popped up during discussion, so > we need revise the GCD in great parts" a case for this? It seems up to the authors, no? And it depends on why author withdrawn before the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D. > Section "Discussion Period": Can the period be extended? What happens > if there is still heavy discussion aber 60 days? IMHO, it=E2=80=99s better if we keep a bounded period. Somehow, if after 60 days we are not able to have a consensus, it means the idea is not ready yet. Based on this output, nothing prevent to resubmit later once new and a fresh point of view comes in. > Section "Deliberate period": IMHO "deliberation" is the wrong term, > since the team members send in their votes. I suggest calling it > "Voting Period", even if someone might argue that in consent based > decision making, "deliberation" is the term to use. I prefer the term =E2=80=99deliberation=E2=80=99, from dictionary: + Deliberation is the long and careful consideration of a subject. + Deliberations are formal discussions where an issue is considered carefully. And, to me the term =E2=80=99vote=E2=80=99 implies to pick a method for vot= ing. Well, if =E2=80=99vote=E2=80=99 is preferred over =E2=80=99deliberation=E2= =80=99, then I would suggest: =E2=80=9CConsensus Voting Period=E2=80=9D to make it clear that=E2=80=99s o= nly the concise expression of what happened during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D. > Section "Deliberate period":The 25% are to be counted at which > valuation date? I propose: Is something lost in translation? :-) > Section "Deliberate period": The sentence "Deliberation aims to =E2=80=A6" > should be moved near the beginning of the section. I agree. > Section "Deliberate period":Same for "Anyone who is a team member..." I agree. And the same idea appeared twice, hence cleaned up. > Section "Deliberate period": "GCD acceptence" and "withdrawal does not > necessarily" should go out of this section into as more general > part. Mayby into "Decision Making" (see my next point on this). I do not know=E2=80=A6 > Section "Deliberate period": IMHO if a vast number of team members > disapprove the proposal it should be taken as rejected. There is no formal distinction between =E2=80=99withdrawn=E2=80=99 because = the author decides to do so or because the consensus leads to a disparagement. Maybe we could introduce that have four potential states for the GCD (accepted or deprecated, rejected, withdrawn). > Section "Decision Making": should go in front of "Timeline", since it > describes the principle. I do not have any opinion. Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 18:02:14 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 13:02:14 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34577 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYUC5-0001dq-VN
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 13:02:14 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::334]:58861)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYUC3-0001dP-EA
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 13:02:12 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4362bae4d7dso8328395e9.1
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737050525; x=1737655325; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=aiOfs8DjUek7yUa5MEb/vHXC5p2sbdwanUbhuqcUUmA=;
b=mLVcP9iJb/xbf2esJG70fcK4lX0MBwrSsRfmnOWkwfEUjJlnoEQ5M41se9UnFPSTzO
FIE/4uGJBiHcsHh/CO+6orj3sONswNo4HKSXIPYYRLt7mBwGBgc5BbivcttwL07mEMkE
q6TONu1e5kN/olUZlNNbCeJDKvH/G3ul6mwIgkNfN5lZL+fel4Hxv0Zb4d89Xm48/hoN
2iR5nw9Y1+IydOKq9f7oO6Uy8+FpXxJimzjKEC8yEERzwXkbtuMz/hJ6dYEyYXVei/H6
U9IrZ9TkD+2USozPOgunxyOqW1aaYgY+ohGQDd90fPzgtWEnjnjZYcWs8wRwoaDDhXyf
ic5Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737050525; x=1737655325;
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=aiOfs8DjUek7yUa5MEb/vHXC5p2sbdwanUbhuqcUUmA=;
b=DQH1HS/F9ossjdkuuns2G8+nFc5r/MfVSYfzRqMYPbbjAk1xgMoPJXT9sExzBt9Y3N
pYIUkU11NMF02YHFI3gkEiAuM1iuQph6GdGtZwOKRKm1ekJlt5mfRrHhLybc3P/TQIEG
D+w3S3fVbK877Jn8no1Moyc7uyJrNhdsNa3pFDSj3yf5sJ2fpCGXMP0y0dhDv97UfwJp
hUR6o28HSTxhtYtuBjmco4d1unFd6kDEmNS6HCnT/xhTgOSHwFj5cD3BxIdxy0pCFrhL
rmO3PDa3PXJQaEOLiUa2JlHCU60PkZSybO5DFeM4GvopgGn7BKbC2a66zEoQCTFLerg3
geLA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCXKDnYRCRhsKJAWH5q1WeTCcTsvOfJWzEUr7PpJzLHTe11jp7DR4VhmdShYnOcL3Vz0C2CgQg==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YycK4TuxjMl+f0AdbtqFZHdfdHVf1dAXkmlpETeCBuPFyPYbGFE
DR6oysgrghfYPgPAcr4VnY0bS16+HLtWLygaF98H3+iczlkhz6ob
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncviNNkk6dCNzJlO1VAU0ErebX3JIcLWl8G2f9Dn50izh0QXZKvvJFxpc0/y7Fd
1QWb6R6f1Q0W9lDt/D0cMqyS/iw1md98ihrJ/rVUtvx2uHVRku8v6RaaReIuSv0XG2fF2NmWkIn
rslc0PNV4hYkvQYAwtGuibRt4PDUQNiCCn3mFOgzZsd1IlFpfIP4xD6J5dJPRMqCC68NsBrYGmF
Or5wqnO+OiD6GlxUU+6VIMBZW86a8/6XXYFvfpDSNDwG+vkcN0AWwZc16RfJrCmfQ6woumAgkkw
v+ktGdp265za2I/wT0xVGS6trOed6cx70PSc4v2Wpg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEHCoBGylc0WSedPM0JfXB0YLoUtEiNXGbSlXpHJTFQgZtQq5VxR85DVyur9eou/RV7kiGLJA==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6d82:0:b0:385:fb59:8358 with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a87358c39mr30255363f8f.53.1737050524314;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-42.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr.
[194.254.61.42]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
ffacd0b85a97d-38bf327e024sm440867f8f.88.2025.01.16.10.02.03
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:02:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v8] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87frlj5e14.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<87jzb3h7ps.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c72lhef.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<87ed131z0y.fsf@HIDDEN> <87frlj5e14.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:50:55 +0100
Message-ID: <871px3t7cw.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
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 Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 10:00, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> “Consensus document” suggests that it’s about documenting the outcome
of > a decision making process.
Content analysis details: (1.1 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:334 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 Date: is 6 to 12 hours before Received: date
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Christopher Baines <mail@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 Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 10:00, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote:
> =E2=80=9CConsensus document=E2=80=9D suggests that it=E2=80=99s about doc=
umenting the outcome of
> a decision making process.
Thanks for explaining.
> I=E2=80=99m fine with the first one though.
>
> (=E2=80=9CAs a sponsor=E2=80=9D, with the article =E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D.)
Noted.
Thanks,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 16:10:54 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 11:10:54 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34384 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYSSM-0004zT-5Q for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 11:10:54 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37080) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tYSSI-0004zD-V6 for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 11:10:52 -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 1tYSS8-0003z3-QV; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 11:10:40 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=rrl3h27glmvn4be7rPEuZwI6tK0ZKSyhoHxM1B6MAqo=; b=M7rYQPkEKborAlbrjvmp KnlntPc8Ivw6G/baL/Nzdi1I0UjBct5Q0IZufF91LIPlQ9YkOuxe5sW9ut5RlHLJ5OHblI34+ZO2t SRAG36RiiizV0+fOKLJpbfMZ19wkHuj1afugI4sqZ/eNWVQdt7NcmEPpPXeYRCBqIDaPXDZZmaRMW 5fcK/ytrQd4jCJJ66gbi0Nn9+yvTJ1uTpIPhqDobYUYD2Y6hh6nEovbn99wt1xcEHTH9Fr8jYPywZ rs3nLu54bef+sxTRxCz/CH9zXqrg/5G5vWRi1+v0F1RXnWza74JekMOLoj5aawsn006OJBzZZRBcZ M2BXn+dX/U0Pog==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> (Andreas Enge's message of "Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:34:30 +0100") References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN> <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 17:10:12 +0100 Message-ID: <874j1y3fkr.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@HIDDEN>, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN, efraim@HIDDEN, rekado@HIDDEN, guix-devel@HIDDEN, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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! Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> skribis: > Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including=20 > when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists > on disapproving? This is a general question about consensus building. For the situation you describe not to happen, the =E2=80=9Cconditions for consensus=E2=80=9D must be meant, as explained for instance in: https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus#conditions Perhaps the =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D section could stress that, wi= th a paragraph above =E2=80=9CTo learn =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D along these lines: Consensus building requires that participants share a common goal, trust each other to act in good faith, listen to one another=E2=80=99s concerns to take them into account, and are committed to donating enough of their time to achieve it. A deliberating member who =E2=80=9Cinsists on disapproving=E2=80=9D, withou= t proposing alternative paths, wouldn=E2=80=99t meet these requirements. I believe right now people who become team members or committers have already demonstrated these abilities. I think this is where these expectations should be clarified and agreed upon. Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 12:04:35 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 07:04:35 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60306 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYOby-0006YW-U9
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 07:04:35 -0500
Received: from mail-qt1-x844.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::844]:55652)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYObv-0006Y8-Q5
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 07:04:32 -0500
Received: by mail-qt1-x844.google.com with SMTP id
d75a77b69052e-467838e75ffso11069921cf.3
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:04:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1737029066; x=1737633866; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date
:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=/OiMDPO4QeN05VvcGQHxVeOLo1NDsSuRmKAEt5Y2sc8=;
b=joU0hoQQ9Rk3lTV0wxNZ6r/VHq2iMO36BCYDGS2ik+TjXzlt+68DMadYlCaLGJktoZ
1xHwzIEjcxmPFDZmpaCLXmyx7Ze6XShIriXYVox+0d6Pe8sJEewLNn9IoPS9E9UXy0k8
hTwFDADGKRsbCy5mK6E0Br0xvFymqHid+dt2Y1FaVOCE+yp5dY/TLRz0YPanSmKoXjsT
VBffAZKX5r3jDnnj5O2hWwuwllrgoXBlE0cm0nO/Lu7M4B+hjIlIZtj4fEVfOz4Uw0zo
bydxApbM8DUAdj4NZv6X79u9bY525cyUusCWDUqCKOPIbZRjixVVyMzGTSbuphjwTvtK
NtKw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737029066; x=1737633866;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent: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=/OiMDPO4QeN05VvcGQHxVeOLo1NDsSuRmKAEt5Y2sc8=;
b=Fw29vcXrw2e7QeSK+N49tP5K5FgW7cGGRR+IEXmjHNFgZ/PKN2XgHzeFnk3mfbqS6i
czHqviync/oB8fRohRw8TEf8foXB+NtpssJtWts0h8kWQv2Cah4/iTSvxuvkUObt+El0
J1sf4quNs43KDWZ3o9YEByoMkqJy6oXzysdQdeEZEb+aOsiRhUX5JQ96UxaH5MFcLy4B
jkUQF4mKaCUE05v1Jg5PQ6q8g9d8JJ1R8YWiCY0NjCjovwoOfpwXH/o8n4nKNFDDWf20
PdoQr+CxTacr4KoQHrAjzZl6x5P9wDA6KadWiIdPrg4d6Kjte/XsNq4uZD9DjyEPCE41
0bcA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCVY5xQkc4XC+drBLjSeE/ezunY8VBv0Pf8SPrD8qwIBDy6t7CnbDoItve/sKzow9MvFMYjJzg==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy/oUPruHqjXRUMPZlRS/ox+JymQ58nlWmNLynLrI5eU9O/c/8h
Ks177HRHYILBXYYv6bFp1/wr0yBFhvvmdRSKYAvkhH0a/fqJAuqB
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncucu7PF0As8P12kLkT0Bqq6R8DouRw1SFDFh/yJAbYUjidOk4uybPSFgDN0QYP
g/6MYap7ZeApGltI7Du4tJ1CC64Ii+uPQ4/rkfMZPRK/ae4paFmE6NM2tM0rxvQSZAdj99xUdcq
CWT/CUsAOgjyd3E8u0ri6EgDpUZTkO9GdVAE+M0TtWe/Xfd8WCKbGcn9aP5Alhms/VCLalfHb61
W/djEVOBZosecw80nlaVyh7hmSGD7zfNLofmQv2YnBwVQk/D18x
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEmExtjBzJy5I2RKAo7ulQ/k1PBQJjVeWpA33U7mXdUMX8N57EmC3EcPC4meSlaeM2Ot4Uiag==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:652:b0:467:5926:fce8 with SMTP id
d75a77b69052e-46c70fd2be9mr453785381cf.9.1737029065734;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:04:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gnus ([70.26.179.129]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
d75a77b69052e-46c873cddfesm74645261cf.57.2025.01.16.04.04.24
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:04:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: Guix Common Document process (v7)
In-Reply-To: <87msfr1zeu.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 15
Jan 2025 23:32:25 +0100")
References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN>
<Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> <87msfr1zeu.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 07:04:14 -0500
Message-ID: <87bjw7vubl.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++)
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: Simon Tournier writes: > That’s why, I proposed (v7) to
use the low traffic info-guix for > announcing and asking for inputs. info-guix
has the following description which, I believe, makes it well-suited to the
task:
Content analysis details: (3.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends
in digit (suhailsingh247[at]gmail.com)
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (suhailsingh247[at]gmail.com)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2607:f8b0:4864:20:0:0:0:844 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@HIDDEN>, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN,
ludo@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN, efraim@HIDDEN, rekado@HIDDEN,
Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, guix-devel@HIDDEN, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.3 (++)
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: Simon Tournier writes: > That’s why, I proposed (v7) to
use the low traffic info-guix for > announcing and asking for inputs. info-guix
has the following description which, I believe, makes it well-suited to the
task:
Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2607:f8b0:4864:20:0:0:0:844 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends
in digit (suhailsingh247[at]gmail.com)
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (suhailsingh247[at]gmail.com)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes:
> That=E2=80=99s why, I proposed (v7) to use the low traffic info-guix for
> announcing and asking for inputs.
info-guix has the following description which, I believe, makes it
well-suited to the task:
"Low-traffic mailing list for announcements to Guix users."
> However, I find better to have the discussion happens inside the bug
> tracker.
Agreed.
> And easier too; because some contributors when replying break the
> email thread (incorrect in-reply-to) then it=E2=80=99s very painful to fo=
llow.
Thank you for considering this failure mode.
> Later, using the bug tracker for discussing, it=E2=80=99s also easy to re=
-read
> all the comments for one willing to understand why we ended up with
> such specific GCD.
Agreed.
--=20
Suhail
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 09:23:38 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 04:23:38 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60021 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYM6E-0007EH-Ae
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:23:38 -0500
Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:39760)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <andreas@HIDDEN>) id 1tYM6B-0007Dz-19
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:23:35 -0500
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A657291;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:23:28 +0100 (CET)
Authentication-Results: hera.aquilenet.fr;
none
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavis at hera.aquilenet.fr
Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP
id wzdL6d0_lMDx; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:23:28 +0100 (CET)
Received: from jurong (unknown [147.210.246.189])
by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 828DFF6;
Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:23:27 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:23:16 +0100
From: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>
To: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: Guix Common Document process (v7) (was: Request-For-Comment, RFC)
Message-ID: <Z4jQBP_a3W23Rphb@jurong>
References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN>
<Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> <87msfr1zeu.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ed13hd1l.fsf@wireframe>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87ed13hd1l.fsf@wireframe>
X-Rspamd-Server: hera
X-Spamd-Bar: ++++
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 9A657291
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [4.25 / 15.00]; SPAM_FLAG(5.00)[];
REPLY(-4.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM(3.00)[1.000];
BAYES_HAM(-1.65)[92.83%]; SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS(1.50)[];
MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain];
RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2];
RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[11]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[];
MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ARC_NA(0.00)[];
TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[];
TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[];
FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[];
FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gmail.com, systemreboot.net, flashner.co.il, gnu.org,
cbaines.net, elephly.net, debbugs.gnu.org]
X-Spam-Level: ****
X-Rspamd-Action: no action
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
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: Am Wed, Jan 15,
2025 at 03:28:54PM -0800 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
> It is a subtle difference, and it is reflected in the functional aspects
> of last proposal I reviewed, as they must be involved i [...]
Content analysis details: (3.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The
query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[185.233.100.1 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com]
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE:
The query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[185.233.100.1 listed in sa-accredit.habeas.com]
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@HIDDEN>, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, ludo@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN,
efraim@HIDDEN, rekado@HIDDEN, guix-devel@HIDDEN,
74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.0 (++)
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: Am Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 03:28:54PM -0800 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
> It is a subtle difference, and it is reflected in the functional aspects
> of last proposal I reviewed, as they must be involved i [...]
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE:
The query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[185.233.100.1 listed in sa-trusted.bondedsender.org]
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The
query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[185.233.100.1 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com]
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
Am Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 03:28:54PM -0800 schrieb Vagrant Cascadian:
> It is a subtle difference, and it is reflected in the functional aspects
> of last proposal I reviewed, as they must be involved in the discussion
They "should" be involved in the last proposal, no? And there is no
explanation of what this means and how it is enforced. Who decides that
a person's disapproval does not count because they have not contributed
sufficiently?
m Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 11:32:25PM +0100 schrieb Simon Tournier:
> > Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including
> > when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists
> > on disapproving?
> Today, how does it happen?
Today, we have no process, so a benevolent dictator (or anyone with
actual operational power) may silently (or noisily) overrule a
disapproval. With a process in place, the veto power is enshrined.
Andreas
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Jan 2025 09:00:52 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 16 04:00:51 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59982 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYLkB-0006CD-H5 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:00:51 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57948) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tYLk9-0006Bx-Gk for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:00:50 -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 1tYLk2-0000rx-75; Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:00:42 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=FNHolqM+zghUTTZ+R5CM48zmwz9lSo5FXOc3CKAUb+Q=; b=qD/H5O7XN99izs89blXy rOlISUnrop7DvPO2BdOctezkASZ2xcaKN5OztgLiPxuap6oVDikYKnfk79z+FxERIUfxJru1vF1xy HS5GYkFiQGxDwr0ujw3GsZVJWUecDyGUUE4KYnMugiXucfcQC2hqnVxjcjJ9NNCqKhZnEd+ilF2ta vKHm6rxxr3doXw75l5FToeZTiuzEqGI7DvhActxZnoC2MlbynE/mG9zY3z1lrj06rIrRd/zi6jdp6 vFd7tfNjFO4DFQIohRizY3VEVcx2snxZgNGNthHX0516lUVPZkq18A66LtaY7F0cEZCE/uUcTtNtm N+6Usb5h69n4Rg==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v8] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87ed131z0y.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:40:45 +0100") References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87jzb3h7ps.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c72lhef.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87ed131z0y.fsf@HIDDEN> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Septidi 27 =?utf-8?Q?Niv=C3=B4se?= an 233 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour du Plomb 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: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:00:39 +0100 Message-ID: <87frlj5e14.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Christopher Baines <mail@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, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> skribis: > Could you explain why =E2=80=9CGuix Common Document=E2=80=9D fails to con= vey what this > is about? =E2=80=9CDocument=E2=80=9D is very broad, and =E2=80=9Ccommon=E2=80=9D is h= ard for me to understand in this context: common to whom? to what? can there more than one =E2=80=9Ccom= mon document=E2=80=9D? The phrase =E2=80=9Ccommon document=E2=80=9D doesn=E2= =80=99t convey that this is about proposing changes and deciding on them. =E2=80=9CRequest for comment=E2=80=9D shows upfront that it=E2=80=99s about= soliciting opinions. =E2=80=9CConsensus document=E2=80=9D suggests that it=E2=80=99s about docum= enting the outcome of a decision making process. >> + - A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see >> + below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the >> + RFC by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments >> + to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as >> + timekeepers. >> + >> + Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently >> + familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommen= ded, but >> + not mandatory, to be a team member. > > I would add: > > As sponsor, please make sure that all have the time and space for > expressing their comments. The GCD is about significant changes,= thus > more opinions is better than less. I think the second sentence is redundant with what is written elsewhere: that it applies to significant changes, and that it=E2=80=99s about solicit= ing opinions (and I think it=E2=80=99s important to keep each section to-the-po= int.) I=E2=80=99m fine with the first one though. (=E2=80=9CAs a sponsor=E2=80=9D, with the article =E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D.) Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jan 2025 23:29:12 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 15 18:29:12 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59226 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYCoy-0006Jr-CS
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:29:12 -0500
Received: from cascadia.aikidev.net ([2600:3c01:e000:267:0:a171:de7:c]:49912)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps
(TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <vagrant@HIDDEN>) id 1tYCou-0006JG-NW
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:29:09 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=debian.org;
s=1.vagrant.user; t=1736983739;
bh=OCZIk278+kVvIPNzfZPnpysy09smP0Il1563n3H1f+o=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=IWJHThwLhNILLU21z4QD46aVl12/BW104zziCK/qqP10l7uFFIkhnWJEDv93wMFf8
kU8KMKKhKnl9r/LwdLoCFy33aqpWwLD9JChAVgp2F+jMuANHNa9Aala65ieJKuYW7m
MvnO6cA4rMWr9dWvBbPtx0w4sbkXn/IdYVWz5glZ52ziy6AQn9Qp8RLb2ApfwMjrbI
lHksRL/nORO0kF/BjPWK6YXDQNykJwTbB7X24uR+4cn9NPm+X4sUqkMpPYvB3zCNbG
84O/RU53MQeVvC3vvqPiUh100Ju2Aci/kOwKxHBTjmj1qOVvUBsPJjpBztOZiWgwne
RmwbSLAlRKoyA==
Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:21:7:77:0:50])
by cascadia.aikidev.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D4311313A;
Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:28:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Andreas Enge
<andreas@HIDDEN>, Arun Isaac <arunisaac@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: Guix Common Document process (v7) (was: Request-For-Comment, RFC)
In-Reply-To: <87msfr1zeu.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN>
<Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> <87msfr1zeu.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:28:54 -0800
Message-ID: <87ed13hd1l.fsf@wireframe>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
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: On 2025-01-15, Simon Tournier wrote: > On Wed, 15 Jan 2025
at 16:34, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> wrote: >> Concerning consensus,
I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including >> when trying to mod [...]
Content analysis details: (3.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 SPF_NONE SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN,
efraim@HIDDEN, rekado@HIDDEN, guix-devel@HIDDEN,
74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.0 (++)
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: On 2025-01-15, Simon Tournier wrote: > On Wed, 15 Jan 2025
at 16:34, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> wrote: >> Concerning consensus,
I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including >> when trying to mod [...]
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 SPF_NONE SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 2025-01-15, Simon Tournier wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 16:34, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> wrote:
>> Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including=20
>> when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists
>> on disapproving?
>
> Today, how does it happen?
>
> Well, I think that better to root the process on what we did over the
> past 12 years. :-) And for now, we always managed the situation, I
> guess. ;-)
>
> Moreover, it=E2=80=99s bounded by an active participation during the =E2=
=80=9CDiscussion
> Period=E2=80=9D. Therefore, if one person cannot live with the final sta=
te, it
> means we failed to find a solution based on what we agree. Somehow, the
> whole idea with consensus is to be pro-active in resolving locks before
> they happen, well that=E2=80=99s my understanding. :-)
I think it is important to not think of the peson as blocking consensus
but to focus on the unresolved issue as blocking consensus. This leads
to identifying what remains to be fixed, rather than interpersonal
conflicts and finger pointing and hurt feelings.
It is a subtle difference, and it is reflected in the functional aspects
of last proposal I reviewed, as they must be involved in the discussion
in order to disapprove of a decision. Getting the framing of focusing on
the issues raised rather than the people raising the issues into our
minds might take more work. :)
> Yes, I agree what happens with examples as: 3/4 support the proposal and
> 1/4 disagree?
Yes, I worry then you are starting to approach voting, where it is more
important to rally your supporters than discuss with and understand
those who think most differently.
With consensus process, it is often a good strategy to get the feedback
and build understanding with the people most likely to dissent, by
honestly listening to their perspective, rather than starting off with a
majority opinion of what "everybody" already agrees with, and then
pressuring everyone else to go along with it.
live well,
vagrant
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCZ4hEtgAKCRDcUY/If5cW
qt0HAQDaUVXL6jhcSs/xoJxRovBUjjGYeUVV6rdcHx8hMOUGCQEA1H+t4Zsl5esW
pcL/4UIhFIA/C5Tu5lUy8hGHaMkjwgo=
=PY+I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jan 2025 22:41:48 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 15 17:41:48 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59164 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYC56-0004Af-2W
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:48 -0500
Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]:52301)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYC4c-00048g-GZ
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:19 -0500
Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-3862ca8e0bbso244724f8f.0
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736980872; x=1737585672; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=7pGP8q/bQAYa6rApgRHmaNO8B0WUWCVM7gKa6ZDaKw8=;
b=EKCFdMhu2fQ2o119rKSrIQQYK3bkU/eCKDH/07UaWFkEQA+Ecge7xMvcih+ZtYR4L1
CA00IUYONdVgBUU6RwLuM/4HnjoKQUyadRLou060vBkBod5bCdSQZWYuZb6+5UgTMTNm
2EzpLh6jjzXqudnBYIL06HjNlMT5gxJkpW2BS2Wd3K0aBnUX5xZk6sIUNDgYeKy8r2R1
n/mSkybUXjPAsDCYCGZcWAUt0WMQy4bhFDm0yCW90CCxmFn36snUEKcdICdkpU+UbgSG
y8abgpBRBkcWiHrL7qLj9Fu8+j/OPaMmrLQn3Vi6wgRyyZrcocAnBFKu/QKOx+WD/D2Y
+UgQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736980872; x=1737585672;
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=7pGP8q/bQAYa6rApgRHmaNO8B0WUWCVM7gKa6ZDaKw8=;
b=oOe6/5W/JJJAZd6hBX8iQtijWpmrqOo9sCJ83/+IOq60PypXyg9+UiZDTvRt+scOMX
52XGUufhcGfzzJsMKZllV/e8fFqUShkyr0UXC3zaxQHe6qGUIjyt0T4HRDqNsvHgxuAk
hsGIQpC4cNFQj61I6aFEbn0xRYpN5A7ANelAU/Hp8zK/NFZwbOf70p3PtKcjO4zFLNi7
Kgf3g00C0ZxZtJE5BhmSX42UdhuyPGwxHAO7CLgccBD2D+vjy4CQJQ2TrVnZJn+hXlnt
4s2x4YQmQ5jsjqnoHJ5janmU82pT/oc5ee420LBI+Gbhm4dmMCtwgJ4o2h4QsiKkRhWN
MFcw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCUH2hWq0TcShpN14Z88cLejxa+Tzz+G7kZCkZtVJlpwZGTVvx5PdTCF+8u0U5kLqCJX4+ET7Q==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwhTciiaf3eTw3S29wcqKyDLclYp6oGYfAahiGp88VtnGpxf+i2
zFGgHyskmws7T385ccQjGZNJDIBJgrEBFMlEwIlnIsjXrNVCrjvxktESWA==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuWNsOghJE7gF1+N48c9oY9IoOHIEC+pRXN48ewUo1p74ASt1vX7/JaUFcMH5E
gAh+gTjp4tkcKPfTE3fLGJCXFCQQ1PgvnkFFQC5vnk3rhzLzZFltF1A0yY6w0LOYg5gB2WE2Qnk
6BW2ICsswQlBF4C/SODnO4eP6r1KO6rUpJUzaURsl4Cm86+MigtzdmEYEQFTiVW135MUwVilj8u
XkrzUNlj19gVTqehbtqAsEvMBSlgOo1fgbk84Z0HZ54eqm0yw1hyVn+BJGtLcSVdTrCDOe81zts
6vKeLwoG2xPye+7HsBOek900YwZE5UD7OXg+9WOv
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFYMZX0OryQzkLhkgbR/fnkvr/sY7EUs1e6VymvTpWogNg+7M4EOs4i7c77iMKoiZpJ6I0Uqw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:712:b0:385:ee3f:5cbf with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a87305369mr25603193f8f.20.1736980872371;
Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (2a01cb0411b186000ad1651703251dcf.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr.
[2a01:cb04:11b1:8600:ad1:6517:325:1dcf])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-437c7499b28sm39655355e9.8.2025.01.15.14.41.10
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v8] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <877c72lhef.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<87jzb3h7ps.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c72lhef.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:40:45 +0100
Message-ID: <87ed131z0y.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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Christopher Baines <mail@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 Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 18:15, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote:
> As for the name, I was fine with =E2=80=9CRFC=E2=80=9D, I=E2=80=99m fine =
with =E2=80=9CGuix Consensus
> Document=E2=80=9D (as pukkamustard suggested), but I would rather avoid =
=E2=80=9CGuix
> Common Document=E2=80=9D, which IMO fails to convey what this is about.
Just to mention that pukkamustard also suggested =E2=80=99Guix Common Docum=
ent=E2=80=99
as the previous Guix Days. ;-) See [1].
Could you explain why =E2=80=9CGuix Common Document=E2=80=9D fails to conve=
y what this
is about?
That=E2=80=99s said, I=E2=80=99m fine with Guix Consensus Document. Becaus=
e even if we
change for another =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9C strategy as a complex =
voting
method, the initial idea will be always encoded for ever! :-)
1: [post Guix Days] Guix Common Document (was: Request-For-Comment process)
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Sat, 03 Feb 2024 11:34:13 +0100
id:87y1c1kfa2.fsf@HIDDEN
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2024-02
https://yhetil.org/guix/87y1c1kfa2.fsf@HIDDEN
> + - A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
> + below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
> + RFC by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
> + to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
> + timekeepers.
> +
> + Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
> + familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommend=
ed, but
> + not mandatory, to be a team member.
I would add:
As sponsor, please make sure that all have the time and space for
expressing their comments. The GCD is about significant changes, t=
hus
more opinions is better than less.
or something along these lines. Because it appears to me important that
we write down that.
WDYT?
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jan 2025 22:41:48 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 15 17:41:48 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59162 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYC55-0004Ac-C9 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:47 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x429.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::429]:52298) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tYC4a-00048Z-4v for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:17 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-x429.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3862ca8e0bbso244714f8f.0 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736980870; x=1737585670; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=ZNyepaHz59atZS+/C59wYIb5MhXYCbZvWnYZASfb7Oc=; b=XNa0dV2Q3Bjl3LNYBU90KuC04UvCLufE44x6E5o9Pj2V5ypQOhAufSGs8RXGStGRv4 2g3phxtLHV6DAd0Zt0yUBge2piKwMmmlhS18ux2HcRBd3zmNcBE9Af2sZwFlJtxu3ySe r7IDHW3XRyBNC0fLztwbQgf6oLkG/K2/ic0FC4Nn4vUr1egM5rHU4Gbx/JrodhbdwLgF ig3M/lTQ9Pu0h+G2PJHS0wEILMlbdWUope19xLdOdnl9RkmaTjh7r1FvXondvaveLr5R N7vWpA2hVxoGxdhmUcVCTV8Y2YOwh6P4C1eoUHBkNM9cDLoFPA4auNyviAL/i0HSwp3N GvgA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736980870; x=1737585670; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ZNyepaHz59atZS+/C59wYIb5MhXYCbZvWnYZASfb7Oc=; b=La76S8KKaWLmypFoO4bEwKTR/dYfGPUAnJT/Iq9IK10qxi2n2xfpTudA/QnD/QlgYX HxFQbus9RpjGvhpKXnLOw2O/jXZR80uFUZINUFgO5SjOkRg0Ff5GzlFJvIB/q/up7zft KNgGegtSf5Q4O5kokCwkI/V4t0QjQU6bB/YyeSCn/1IXkWStvPv3Fum4tYJ6nEHhjJ3X k6m+E3usWfKjb4rdXI4j5rpbcSAjjBC8L9+VC/rtjZ8kcyliBKLtrxcZuzNjJp7kFM7R PIcCHPCmy23FE4PnsR+3ttxMwWn+eOPeq9y4AEBREIdsHaJSw+AxWELkXvjLTg2NlUbN CqBA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVUkORYd3PI9I3ALQnSYut9KvGPFk15Y/knSDc4nh8c6VAK03ML8axt45O6KYUwx7zXgCTsIg==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxVzRHomTVkoQ7F6L3kLKXn945FDKxDdo+qv4eJSdTXnB7fZ1Y8 SVrYSflXszmTeAw7qIzrqzTbUl+0h7umr0+PnX8lvfkYyC0M+bpk X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctjzDK8cHK5av5luYG1aXhN07j8jzkjfiDKjd92RauZWgEyPh2MuxTAYefSXGQ 0WDpc+LDfMzd/NnMz3Sa0F4aDzzPW7yBv6TJIYwBa+0iwY+ySteYqQTmme6q1ftrAKIspq9kEyP Vps2pCH8LPPKc1AMnWIl1R9npUCl5MV6wa6e0ELZ+yIwWNNo0gS5uuNgSCOo/2tHhLAAN7rAwfv Pdope/ML8SsooMpVkR48pqFvDM4Yjl70SoLu6hb1MkMAspaDofjrofKJFs4UaXdlUpu1tmZ8gX7 R0Mna0HrRGMa3ENAUU0nUQ7r3doelcVcvfF9iC7e X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHgd8tJkczp+e4/K2jTk5zchL/1qIx59Y92Fy0JthmcEsv8Col6+cyHnG/GL0lbRIiB5it54A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:186e:b0:385:dc45:ea22 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38a87338d84mr36027467f8f.39.1736980869881; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (2a01cb0411b186000ad1651703251dcf.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb04:11b1:8600:ad1:6517:325:1dcf]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38a8e4b81d7sm18787584f8f.73.2025.01.15.14.41.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:09 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>, Arun Isaac <arunisaac@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Common Document process (v7) (was: Request-For-Comment, RFC) In-Reply-To: <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN> <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:32:25 +0100 Message-ID: <87msfr1zeu.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: 74736 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN, efraim@HIDDEN, rekado@HIDDEN, guix-devel@HIDDEN, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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, 15 Jan 2025 at 16:34, Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> wrote: > I like Arun's suggestion of having a separate mailing list for > discussing these important changes (GCD? Greatest common divisors!) > in the future instead of guix-devel. Why do we need a special mailing list? I understand why one does not want to subscribe because the volume might appear to high. Therefore, in this case, I agree that guix-devel is not suitable for announcement. That=E2=80=99s why, I proposed (v7) to use the low traffic info-guix for announcing and asking for inputs. However, I find better to have the discussion happens inside the bug tracker. And easier too; because some contributors when replying break the email thread (incorrect in-reply-to) then it=E2=80=99s very painful to follow. Later, using the bug tracker for discussing, it=E2=80=99s also eas= y to re-read all the comments for one willing to understand why we ended up with such specific GCD. WDYT? > Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including=20 > when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists > on disapproving? Today, how does it happen? Well, I think that better to root the process on what we did over the past 12 years. :-) And for now, we always managed the situation, I guess. ;-) Moreover, it=E2=80=99s bounded by an active participation during the =E2=80= =9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D. Therefore, if one person cannot live with the final state= , it means we failed to find a solution based on what we agree. Somehow, the whole idea with consensus is to be pro-active in resolving locks before they happen, well that=E2=80=99s my understanding. :-) Yes, I agree what happens with examples as: 3/4 support the proposal and 1/4 disagree? Well, it would mean we do not have the consensus. until now we tried to rely on such method for decision making. And it seems to work, no? > The RFC/GCD says: "A team member sending this reply should have made > constructive comments during the discussion period." What if they have > not? They cannot. A deliberating member must be active during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D else this member cannot disapprove. Ot= herwise it would be unfair for all non-deliberating participants. :-) > How about adding a quorum of "disapprove" votes to have effect? Personally, I am more worried with the quorum of 25% that could be difficult to reach than about one =E2=80=9Cdisapprove=E2=80=9D. Well, maybe we could set to 2. But why not 3? Or 4? Or a percentage? Somehow, a quorum defeats the idea of =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D bas= ed on consensus, no? > Notice also that the suggestion bootstraps the team members into a > decision taking body - so far we have added people more or less randomly > to teams. Yes, I agree. Currently, teams members is not really defined. However, it appears to me another work than the current proposal. For instance, we could imagine a GCD that explain the various roles: User, Contributor, Team Member, Committer, Maintainer, etc. Next step? :-) =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20= =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 > Or keep the proposal as is and immediately > work on a new GCD to somehow safeguard the addition of people to a team? I am in favor of that: work a new GCD about the various roles. Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jan 2025 22:41:17 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 15 17:41:16 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59158 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYC4a-00048o-29
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:16 -0500
Received: from mail-wr1-x42b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42b]:51294)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYC4P-00047R-5K
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:05 -0500
Received: by mail-wr1-x42b.google.com with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-385e0e224cbso142015f8f.2
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736980859; x=1737585659; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=VSgWa8xAgXgTWP402q6TMxiKWPMbPyv5DF+cmHy+Jos=;
b=g1FjhkzPvYDW+Co+wVxuusG9ynSXCLyNeHv4oUPsveRlNtwpfAK1gicltNr336B3y1
pnNUh3+fhj3N78GRG7g5d/zqOR2tzkEVe5tFuKD1izpA6KhbC8mSUJA8d1jm3D++yHwm
x9T0Dl1GGg7YQ9mPnRgxdmsuqqKAtrXN5aOA0XZtT01G3PjoCtsPJkunf/v2Gf0y37vM
FgPeNf2iHNbELwgclnmGcSeh178u5PRuG1VuvX63jWSWwL5Dj/TAdReaeh8Yfxw7UTmN
qJnrAxGGeOi4Hvo94fm36l/D/B+G0x3xBxRLTPC/VVEyFt/hHwAKBKO4G7X2aHsoEPPY
6Img==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736980859; x=1737585659;
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=VSgWa8xAgXgTWP402q6TMxiKWPMbPyv5DF+cmHy+Jos=;
b=eAaCs3sw6IATSDAVSdjzFtwUT91XVMW8dEzVrkEYIZQKdvW13k+t7pgWWHVghlx/td
3/4Jl4i3yR53/KAHGpDHx/JVazog+Z+3czFJ6LTGJboVXyh47amyaXPZQkkdNvSO3XaP
zxF7miieVULcfq8+HKzNDVM+xYx9zuoTw3DhqUm9LS4n3v+Po/o6graZK8+9zaMr0U46
nPpd7LE3wHY5a30oay6pHtl80ENrETda8y/2Pa7vblK4C0CJBdTsILNWnZ+tKOejHn2o
tWdfQ54YVpR0a2D8Xv+m8AUSjWAO8HcrORc2v/utBw5eDRXF1ZdKFCA2NyUWXdPVItCy
+bog==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCUv0y7rn6y5g/E/B/4NYxZUSYSY9Puck7f2GAHU3x53DqyAtQiUYUnya3wA3Yhl3yv3ugtKtQ==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyOkNifRY9M0NwVVmIHhmzixMV71pdIw16RUNYPy2JNz0kNr+3k
wS5D7eURa2ZxRM55a5yn2UWjWFGSoJOiyOXEdz2g6SXJ+t6foBVt
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuKQwtDQD9ZJaorvr+NDHSTVo6LYGkmwLSnZCIoWaf5cIuxu/8R1Gu65pt5e/S
Wam62tgExNCKmJ86gG2ekE243UNetipVDcB539t3LCu8aJcyQ87DBImLJ7G+jqJLC8xGJ3/h9a3
QQRYJwiixbdXSQZmHnpt+ZvHLVkrEn4hbY2Irzr6Nzf/tCjCw4HSyW/hvolBmxFft8F45AVefsD
lOK3qBrqABAe8U7acp45o34H3XHHvjHkuZ4oLv/WKX5mRrpoLfE8h+eUjv4nspA4D1W+ReWrNFV
/8hJNUX2i95wGNW1+stu8EebKeDhG4xE+zrvmyQC
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGiBLt7cfhQ8KkC5Ytwy2/OCOhNnjS9qN8aGmL0PsIQXcPwkAbUEmMRcvU6ASlgaNTCgeSmLA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2a9:b0:385:f398:3e2 with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a87308c0amr26460664f8f.37.1736980858922;
Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:40:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (2a01cb0411b186000ad1651703251dcf.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr.
[2a01:cb04:11b1:8600:ad1:6517:325:1dcf])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-437c74ad59fsm37301335e9.16.2025.01.15.14.40.57
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:40:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
In-Reply-To: <871pxaolkg.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
<87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87h667nmdk.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87y0zikfch.fsf@HIDDEN> <871pxaolkg.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:12:01 +0100
Message-ID: <87v7uf3n9a.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
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 Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 14:17, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
>> Ah you mean that the case of ’two authors’ does not require a Sponsor*,
>> right? > > Ah yes, > > Possibly I'm splitting hairs here too much. But
ISTM that having one > author and one sponsor b [...]
Content analysis details: (1.1 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 Date: is 3 to 6 hours before Received: date
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:42b listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Cour?= =?utf-8?Q?t=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
=?utf-8?Q?N?= =?utf-8?Q?o=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@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 Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 14:17, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN> wrote:
>> Ah you mean that the case of =E2=80=99two authors=E2=80=99 does not requ=
ire a Sponsor*,
>> right?
>
> Ah yes,
>
> Possibly I'm splitting hairs here too much. But ISTM that having one
> author and one sponsor being enough, whereas in the situation where an
> early sponsor actually contributes to become a second author, they would
> now have to go look for a third person. Dunno.
I don=E2=80=99t know either. :-)
Well, from my point of view, once the proposal is =E2=80=9CSubmitted=E2=80=
=9D, it means
it had been qualified (2 authors or 1 author + 1 sponsor) and then it
does not matter much if the name appears as author or sponsor; or if
more people become author.
The essential is to have a fruitful =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D and=
then to
cross the final line, IMHO.
> It's a puzzle indeed. I was thinking: if "everyone involved" agrees it
> could be done/decided quicker, policy seems to prevent that. Otoh, that
> protects the "why wasn't I consulted" problem. So yeah.
Yeah, a balance. :-)
I think the process can be refined later if it does not match enough the
way we collaborate. After all, the aim is to ease the important
decisions and not to add useless bureaucracy =E2=80=9C=C3=A0 la fran=C3=A7a=
ise=E2=80=9D. ;-)
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jan 2025 22:41:16 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 15 17:41:16 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59156 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYC4Z-00048m-MO for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:16 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]:60596) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tYC4M-00047N-C6 for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:02 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436202dd7f6so2318385e9.0 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:41:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736980856; x=1737585656; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=6IAGWPl0r9twMBhEctw+QXKv2WgTe/LbeCJ3O1TvojQ=; b=HVu/lFiFYFsq/o+LpsnMawxMU0Nd6WB5qOKsVQ4Ap9Gq2hbeLKdIamCXs0yEjhk2qv Ja1MkEFhtgNQVIHEfgGt2opSFngmHrUJd0ktcCdXTdYXxs3AVKDJ2PA5hkFRR/JIZNrK 89lDGJGwfG0aLr+lsfJSqOBnkcIGTb5chNLxCq5tp76c7UqtVehFMDdFrHL7nhCWkClj RhdPXICujHLFtAdJKbQxrBe2yxENd1ITCNd/8fSEzqp9tPL7to3H5sQqFCqhJElLGnF0 h2cyZeNJN5Kj3jCdVWpQjzzALfHYmY8uCfPT1Anx8f3X4MUA+8bd1QEuV0GKdXW9lz1L R38Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736980856; x=1737585656; 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=6IAGWPl0r9twMBhEctw+QXKv2WgTe/LbeCJ3O1TvojQ=; b=wdwUwlddXKbMP0SiLGJ7Yu/fu9vd6CdMaWFt8u6tu9AYO2Syf7h1ab18awAzi321OF 7VNWQt2xknePdkLDPnfPUb0pUWEPH7HtSGW4rDbCZZwp2rBBkOKDKM+o3HAUM8/ILGyA hFrdT3BUoIqj1bLX/tfzT1kxr0+zDTtSbeTXzVfjQ+ox/Ea4N/gwcqk69wNEbFJ8sQGS 7lkXj42WOFsNEjGiQxcrlYgSkO7SVl2/3x3skFJuD5k3T3ggJvS9SrcOFzzzj6l+0YFU 4Mq6l+YQLJkbnS2BgzKy98NDgU+MNFtCIjewEKCe2x9TCsYgUwKvIBoUTAmk6U0/plA+ LJzg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVjq9eSe9jjZSazb/u/rI8/EaWTg/OLGcCcwL2CSuq6fUFBhiIfIVgEJ5yUiOkyuSgObq/xvA==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwnX58Bwxzkjss/lLRxPY5x+Ezzyjt+KnF1lOg9LGQLvm/lYEFS nYDUgwvxjU5/d+BWLmCNUWM6UODCuH24dq7+pEkxkyEzc+cQ0fkI X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncs1ewKW6RvSR8Lj+9rdw4eupt659KGblL8K9U4eBqX2v5y1muE0yAWK3+kiL9r X4dQllUhfsagisxbjwgJHr+lYaZJxSpWXDbhuvYq9muVoq/h5a7tX6lUgYtDypenhh18jV9nJ+E h3LzG3q7WLgg3y8CahmJLJ2A4r2VSw6oC5chUgYmpc83DWicCSWxlFAuJVtw+N70xchsE+OlFMK lJxL7LDra+FuWht799bZTMWUXGYulm8ZCVEPuMgWq4VUgMSp6QyY47td31/YeVfhDmkro8ZOL6j Ze5DvZQcZT9pg1rpw6Oc0JekJSCMScUbd+QkUiP0 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFBXeCv5WTR1xh25/HfY+jPo7lNn1IRfwA3+CuZtpq4dpeXI+5gzRjUw3VVAHvnWxXh5+oxgw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4751:b0:435:23c:e23e with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e26af4b4mr298816255e9.12.1736980856256; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:40:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (2a01cb0411b186000ad1651703251dcf.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb04:11b1:8600:ad1:6517:325:1dcf]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-437c749989asm38865435e9.2.2025.01.15.14.40.55 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:40:55 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process. In-Reply-To: <87sepnh4gy.fsf@wireframe> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <878qrjh56c.fsf@wireframe> <8734hqluu3.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sepnh4gy.fsf@wireframe> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:58:30 +0100 Message-ID: <8734hj52g9.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 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 Sun, 12 Jan 2025 at 17:45, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > It mashes together "good direction, with concerns" and "good enough > direction, with concerns" and "tolerable direction, with concerns". It > may not be necessary having those so fine-grained, and [...] Content analysis details: (1.1 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com) 1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 Date: is 3 to 6 hours before Received: date 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:32f listed in] [list.dnswl.org] X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@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 Sun, 12 Jan 2025 at 17:45, Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN> wrote: > It mashes together "good direction, with concerns" and "good enough > direction, with concerns" and "tolerable direction, with concerns". It > may not be necessary having those so fine-grained, and being able to > reflect that as part of the concerns raised and noted. > >> Well, I think these concerns are captured during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion= Period=E2=80=9D >> and they should be included in the section =E2=80=9CDrawback=E2=80=9D or= =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D. > > Sounds good to me, sure! [...] >>> I also wonder if there is a supermajority of "I accept" over "I support" >>> this maybe should raise some sort of red flag calling into question the >>> proposal... as that is a very weak consensus and perhaps cause for >>> concern. >> >> Good point. Maybe this is the same as above about having these concerns >> written down in the final document under a dedicated section as >> =E2=80=9CDrawback=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D. WDYT? > > Yeah, something along those lines. Does it address the comment above about fine-grained =E2=80=9CI accept=E2= =80=9D? Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jan 2025 22:41:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 15 17:41:02 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59152 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tYC4M-00047y-5Z for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:02 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x329.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::329]:49315) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tYC4J-00047J-Gf for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:41:00 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x329.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-43623f0c574so1283405e9.2 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:40:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736980853; x=1737585653; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=oQEhK2G3LfAceVqd+/FApkiBy+LSeyUactaW+kl4soc=; b=EcmDRp1Qe7n0RBX+UxLdEHVbJPB0nZN4z0ghfx7i8zAJQRMJwDYjgBxQ735gvc5FgT NXdne4yNcx550ygRdnzganPXsHBOpAPd7R3TeCV3kPMCPZ++kg4JV1uYofgaXUAu6NWu hWcsf6LrAwUelZq6/GCu95rcczppoTQ5RpvemQ3gqOJrF2Zd9klkccqGlEQz8/p7Yc2f Z/SoF6UohttC1AVVeEufRKg0YBfsZjKWHDQEFIHLiqw5yyIDW9ccMkUnpBi4O9bN4prN 1ObJft5ZJ6TU498T+oATABHQcXQ2xSka1wY7QBd1OPUlO+4VHJH3+pTPAj01T19XVOjQ W6ow== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736980853; x=1737585653; 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=oQEhK2G3LfAceVqd+/FApkiBy+LSeyUactaW+kl4soc=; b=uJjTKOg7qTfgsgYjmSI12UzC9/iHDyqpwJYUQKRnp4jPlI8ML2zMAtpfoK4PaPEaue EUWdSpTFp5jjP+K0lULHIsx2ZEgJgxd5Yx3XXEZF73fThzEXvxO8pfHmlJmMlP4MCmrw zYM33MVV0P3ReEv0xTv1yLoz8PWOKRmsjF+tD6VTypAR7ohpU6IxYtLSPKo0Fa3JSHA6 qCHHhnlObyAg+pebbIYExQ+JBn3+uqx8gF1+XX6FJZbUKdsRm1GkMpsphAbDlkOJQ28Q sUcepAG+Oaghg6ub5t5vKsB49ZGXjJDAhhecTbeicp3rX1oBypmv+NoQ3lzWvcIfml+l CpuA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX4FFcIOD4sWVB1sJbRA4Z3oy5W6NwRojuq/i2UhNPvJs8ZvskYXz8vBd95oKwaHw4vWA9ahg==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxZTEV3T7LI7rXCkIjIE7droE4o8xFNebfBSKsOu01o/nVDBHHV cz95tRghv0J9FKTZHgAB2zNW4Y10NmxeuJYlnmyAkk1Rd1FSidtMFmuRxg== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvk3KsHLSXV3U+/jauJIsrkfbgYZmxYTuh6UoHBNtfvQGjtYS0BeljFmTykHJn IoULN79QG04JTQCjyLgr/ey0LwT/RJHQUE83U6ujgRcrNjmZK/uRnYFpxdKFOaGlb4rkNGaBmn/ ch21i1NKUnjqKLWafhpoR/Ggpc5SvDhvniZnINn3KbnB948KOyPqKHnr2SMj1GK2vhik1KdG+iZ WgoPaUx2d6xMF3g4ColV9oqI7fGi0x7btu3MkTw+kA2ipy87DItLkBkiGuNmms2iEqcIJTe4QR0 J0ohidolVUTeftv6nQlo4FXkk4LW6nAxjyWbZsqm X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEPXq1erhQ5xfK5I8xrO4nbM9Zv9RSIz3ptOAuoSQ7c4ILdK7BLSw6fXxUhdBsZ7+kJycg1EA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3c85:b0:434:a802:e99a with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e267821emr274172885e9.4.1736980853205; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:40:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (2a01cb0411b186000ad1651703251dcf.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb04:11b1:8600:ad1:6517:325:1dcf]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-437c7527fc4sm37829195e9.27.2025.01.15.14.40.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:40:52 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87tta6fa6m.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c75vao7.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hsqfqz.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hrioxe.fsf@HIDDEN> <87wmf3ymua.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sepqkeji.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta6fa6m.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:44:19 +0100 Message-ID: <877c6v533w.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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 Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 19:47, Suhail Singh wrote: > IMO, "Guix Change Process", or "Guix Change Proposal", or "Guix > Enhancement Proposal" may be more self-evident. Content analysis details: (1.1 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com) 1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 Date: is 3 to 6 hours before Received: date 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:329 listed in] [list.dnswl.org] X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Cour?= =?utf-8?Q?t=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 19:47, Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN> wrote: > IMO, "Guix Change Process", or "Guix Change Proposal", or "Guix > Enhancement Proposal" may be more self-evident. There is only two things really hard: cache invalidation and naming. ;-) Thank you for these suggestions. Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jan 2025 21:50:31 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 15 16:50:31 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59031 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tYBHT-0001ho-1m
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:50:31 -0500
Received: from libre.brussels ([144.76.234.112]:60438)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <indieterminacy@HIDDEN>)
id 1tYBHQ-0001hW-KJ
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:50:29 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=libre.brussels;
s=mail; t=1736977821;
bh=/VF7HnaoSXQDfoFjrAe0u8wcIt4ljanX2Fy3PC3P+Zo=;
h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
b=ZLLKaNh5TY/Vgkb3KCeNX9cqV+L3diVkdup0bZDjkBTwu1ohPTyC0WXnWvDtWLdPs
gRxFpgyeBhJnCkOzqRVyZL4c5uaJmr5W+kq6ngLDfkhons8BZFwFiw3DT7+FbAOPqv
uI96tkoki8SPM7iWFc1rTLkqUZDATFscEaV2eoGI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:50:21 +0000
From: indieterminacy <indieterminacy@HIDDEN>
To: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: Guix Common Document process (v7)
In-Reply-To: <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong>
References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN>
<Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong>
Message-ID: <6b4b2d6b8af55e03155544fd8ef05cab@HIDDEN>
X-Sender: indieterminacy@HIDDEN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
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: Hello Andreas, On 2025-01-15 15:34, Andreas Enge wrote: >
... > > Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including
> when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person > insists
> o [...]
Content analysis details: (3.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The
query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[144.76.234.112 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com]
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE:
The query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[144.76.234.112 listed in sa-trusted.bondedsender.org]
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@HIDDEN>, guix-maintainers@HIDDEN,
zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN,
efraim@HIDDEN, rekado@HIDDEN, guix-devel@HIDDEN,
74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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: 2.0 (++)
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: Hello Andreas, On 2025-01-15 15:34, Andreas Enge wrote: >
... > > Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including
> when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person > insists
> o [...]
Content analysis details: (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE:
The query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[144.76.234.112 listed in sa-trusted.bondedsender.org]
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The
query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[144.76.234.112 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com]
3.0 MANY_TO_CC Sent to 10+ recipients
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
Hello Andreas,
On 2025-01-15 15:34, Andreas Enge wrote:
> ...
>
> Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including
> when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person
> insists
> on disapproving? (I am reminded of the European Union where one member
> state can effectively hold the others hostage over certain issues.)
> The RFC/GCD says: "A team member sending this reply should have made
> constructive comments during the discussion period." What if they have
> not? How about adding a quorum of "disapprove" votes to have effect?
> (Actually in Europe *two* member states are needed for a veto in the
> Council.)
>
I wonder whether the 'political ability' of somebody being able to use
deadlock leavers
should be limited to those who are active/recent members.
Does it seem sensible to have this in place already?
> Notice also that the suggestion bootstraps the team members into a
> decision taking body - so far we have added people more or less
> randomly
> to teams. For instance, team members need not have commit rights and
> thus be vetted by three fellow committers. So should we replace "team
> members" by "committers"? Or keep the proposal as is and immediately
> work on a new GCD to somehow safeguard the addition of people to a
> team?
>
Btw, thanks Andreas for your work as Treasurer!
See you in Brussels soon,
Jonathan
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Jan 2025 15:34:43 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 15 10:34:43 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58340 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tY5Pn-0006no-7d for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 10:34:43 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:47284) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <andreas@HIDDEN>) id 1tY5Pk-0006nS-99 for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 10:34:41 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4A8B543; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:34:33 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: hera.aquilenet.fr; none X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavis at hera.aquilenet.fr Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id 26nvFt9i4b8k; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:34:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from jurong (176-179-191-150.abo.bbox.fr [176.179.191.150]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7130F22C; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:34:32 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:34:30 +0100 From: Andreas Enge <andreas@HIDDEN> To: Arun Isaac <arunisaac@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix Common Document process (v7) (was: Request-For-Comment, RFC) Message-ID: <Z4fVhpXCDeYXPzUE@jurong> References: <87bjwfh6p8.fsf@HIDDEN> <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87tta4nk21.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Rspamd-Server: hera X-Spamd-Bar: +++++++ X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: A4A8B543 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [7.22 / 15.00]; SPAM_FLAG(5.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM(3.00)[1.000]; BAYES_HAM(-2.68)[98.60%]; SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS(1.50)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[10]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gmail.com, flashner.co.il, gnu.org, cbaines.net, elephly.net, debbugs.gnu.org] X-Spam-Level: ******* X-Rspamd-Action: add header X-Spam: Yes X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: guix-maintainers@HIDDEN, zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN, efraim@HIDDEN, rekado@HIDDEN, guix-devel@HIDDEN, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@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 all, thank you for moving this forward! May I suggest to keep guix-devel posted when sending comments to the bug? I like Arun's suggestion of having a separate mailing list for discussing these important changes (GCD? Greatest common divisors!) in the future instead of guix-devel. Janneke, I think another motivation for such a process is to make sure that some decision is actually reached in the end, instead of letting discussions taper out. I feel that this tends to happen in Guix and Guix Foundation. Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists on disapproving? (I am reminded of the European Union where one member state can effectively hold the others hostage over certain issues.) The RFC/GCD says: "A team member sending this reply should have made constructive comments during the discussion period." What if they have not? How about adding a quorum of "disapprove" votes to have effect? (Actually in Europe *two* member states are needed for a veto in the Council.) Notice also that the suggestion bootstraps the team members into a decision taking body - so far we have added people more or less randomly to teams. For instance, team members need not have commit rights and thus be vetted by three fellow committers. So should we replace "team members" by "committers"? Or keep the proposal as is and immediately work on a new GCD to somehow safeguard the addition of people to a team? Andreas
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Jan 2025 21:17:16 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 13 16:17:16 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53063 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tXRoC-0006gO-8U for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:17:16 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38814) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tXRo8-0006fo-WC for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:17:13 -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 1tXRo1-00049z-4Q; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:17:06 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=DZ/3zhYk9t1l1pq1XpZdFAzq8bctSnQEIv+KeCG7Wks=; b=B3Ea5nrcJmZs0MgA2qnG YUSiR/wFKFKZ4EBmW+yx/Q5+K3AfG0djh0ZVyiFLDtAZ0VmvcG6ewi+JC8gUWNLByLa8wrs6BtSIW ygHDOP8i9KlOp8uNS9XjiOkLQtIeSNMGaQpnTaYkah1GY9ekhtv9hHIJqUcUKq49jGCYvJ4OwI2eb Ksmujw/A4m9+vY+ZBbN+qjCeubuLAnsNHSgc+erzmU+Azv9LpOptnN/bTd/6uX/1qWR7EwiNR4MV4 V4lXOKS7JKijuUHhKm1OmnDjOekGkQN4nZS6bLhsu9P4S1+XcseO7aDKNtol9rn2S9qU5z1rL2HS3 msY+czbMR4Dpxw==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN> (Hartmut Goebel's message of "Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:57:51 +0100") References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:17:01 +0100 Message-ID: <87wmey9zxu.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 Hartmut, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN> skribis: > being late to the discussion, here are my 2 cent. Please apologize if thi= ngs have already been discussion and decided. No worries, we still have a bit of time to discuss, thanks for chiming in! I agree with most of your suggestions/comments. I=E2=80=99ll just comment = where deserved: > Section "How the Process Works", number 3: I don't understand "must not b= e prospective". According to dict.leo.org, "prospective" > translates in German to adjectives like long-sighted put also to in the f= uture, estimated, likley. This is meant to suggest (I believe) that the process is not meant as a way to brainstorm new ideas; instead, it should be applied to ideas that we roughly know how to implement. > Section "Roles", Sponsor: "is a contributor" and "should be a contributor= ". Contributor to the GCD or to Guix? What makes one a > "contributor"? Is the term defined somewhere else, e.g. in the Guix Manua= l? It=E2=80=99s not defined; we can add it to =E2=80=9CRoles=E2=80=9D. > Section "Submission Period", Withdrawal and Resubmit: Are there any rules= why or when an author may resubmit the GCD? Is feedback > like "The idea is good, but a lot of things popped up during discussion, = so we need revise the GCD in great parts" a case for this? It=E2=80=99s up to authors to decide what to do based on the feedback they = got (or lack thereof). If nobody was willing to sponsor it, then perhaps it=E2=80=99s a sign that people either disapprove it or are uninterested in= it in its current form. > Section "Discussion Period": Can the period be extended? What happens if = there is still heavy discussion aber 60 days? It has to be at most 60 days, I think that=E2=80=99s quite clear. > Section "Deliberate period": IMHO "deliberation" is the wrong term, since= the team members send in their votes. I suggest calling it "Voting > Period", even if someone might argue that in consent based decision makin= g, "deliberation" is the term to use. I proposed =E2=80=9CVoting Period=E2=80=9D but we eventually considered that =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D would better represent what this is. > Section "Deliberate period":The 25% are to be counted at which valuation = date? I propose:=20 You propose what? :-) Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Jan 2025 01:45:17 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jan 12 20:45:17 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49628 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tX9W1-0005j3-64 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:45:17 -0500 Received: from cascadia.aikidev.net ([2600:3c01:e000:267:0:a171:de7:c]:57984) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <vagrant@HIDDEN>) id 1tX9Vy-0005dy-8K for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:45:15 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=debian.org; s=1.vagrant.user; t=1736732706; bh=UKbKvc/rrtRP2jW9imzhHFoop6IKzd4KXNgcdMCxZt4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=npsD0F/WocuIJ6V/SuIvnq0wPmUzWl2OGBLkEyjHti7dI2qhKsqfiWO0lwjAjV8kW Pmhg59Xf8FJbAUPuo0S2ZiSedMTQ/ZuEv++7QfNh38ixpDJ3uuEY8m6xCaxXL7R0mu PoDP24cZYAZFIXvToKjl9UYfbsZ45k15QZEbFtKwQb7SwAQ3xS6EB2gsNzyr1+SCjs 0msrl9EXabs+30fz41p6WwOsRwCvlFWM1A+fObAq0Cfjp21Hcdl5UdOr/krCYSenJw HxXGS73K+fCnMvkkSYIrq+7xH5uMfHowX054ZotS8biv3/Cu3usabctONJa+YcfPiV JfY6B/GPNNv1w== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:21:7:77:0:50]) by cascadia.aikidev.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC9283109; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 17:45:06 -0800 (PST) From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process. In-Reply-To: <8734hqluu3.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <878qrjh56c.fsf@wireframe> <8734hqluu3.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 17:45:01 -0800 Message-ID: <87sepnh4gy.fsf@wireframe> 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: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@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 On 2025-01-10, Simon Tournier wrote: > On Thu, 09 Jan 2025 at 16:40, Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN> wrot= e: > >> Is 'no one disagrees' =3D=3D 'no one replies with "I disapprove"'? It wo= uld >> be nicer if there were more explicit alignment in the words used to make >> that clearer, if that is, in fact, the intended case. Perhaps >> literally... e.g. ... (2) if no one declares "I disapprove". > > I hope it is clarified with v7 [1]: > > The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members sen= d a > reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is > *withdrawn*. > > WDYT? Hah. Subtle but meaningful difference! Yes, I think that captures it. > Maybe, =C2=AB (2) if no one declares "I disapprove". =C2=BB seems even cl= earer? It does seem clearer, but the match between "I disapprove" and disapproves is probably sufficient to address my concern. >> Obviously, one can and should declare their reservations as part of the >> discussion that lead up to that point! Although maybe "I accept" should >> come with the option to declare formal outstanding concerns? > > Well, that=E2=80=99s the distinction between =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D = and =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, no? That is my understanding... > Somehow, the idea with =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D is =E2=80=9CI think it= =E2=80=99s the good direction > although I have these concerns X and Y but I can with live all that=E2=80= =9D. It mashes together "good direction, with concerns" and "good enough direction, with concerns" and "tolerable direction, with concerns". It may not be necessary having those so fine-grained, and being able to reflect that as part of the concerns raised and noted. > Well, I think these concerns are captured during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion = Period=E2=80=9D > and they should be included in the section =E2=80=9CDrawback=E2=80=9D or = =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D. Sounds good to me, sure! >> Similarly "I disaprove" should not come out of nowhere; it should be >> clear why, and perhaps worth having an option to note that in the call >> for consensus at the end of the Deliberation Period? > > I agree. Does this wording v7 [1]: > > - =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the im= plementation of the > proposal. A team member sending this reply must have actively > cooperated with for discussing the RFC during the discussion pe= riod. > See =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D. > > answer to your comment? In addition, =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D s= ection > contains: > > Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these con= cerns > are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating = member > disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding altern= atives, > proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the stat= us quo. > > Therefore, =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D cannot come out of nowhere beca= use the person > who disapproves must comment during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80= =9D on the why. > > That=E2=80=99s said, do you suggest that the reply =E2=80=9CI disapprove= =E2=80=9D during the > =E2=80=9CDeliberating Period=E2=80=9D should come with a summary about wh= y? I *think* so, even though it should have already been made clear through earlier discussion that there was an issue... it may not always be clear, especially with asyncronous communications, what each person final stance is at the end of those prior discussions. > And such summary would be then included in the Document with the state > of =E2=80=99widthdrawn=E2=80=99. At least the major points of disapproval should be summarized succinctly somewhere. I am not terribly particular about where. :) >> I also wonder if there is a supermajority of "I accept" over "I support" >> this maybe should raise some sort of red flag calling into question the >> proposal... as that is a very weak consensus and perhaps cause for >> concern. > > Good point. Maybe this is the same as above about having these concerns > written down in the final document under a dedicated section as > =E2=80=9CDrawback=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D. WDYT? Yeah, something along those lines. live well, vagrant --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCZ4RwHQAKCRDcUY/If5cW ql+uAQCbHM1DE+qNNI2n3TZGDAyUL9H4oxmONCWXexiKkdB9DAEAtBy4KhDkI7hJ R027G+OGlqoFsO3x8sCb8f0Nr5ITGAc= =N1li -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jan 2025 15:58:00 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jan 12 10:57:59 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48849 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tX0Lf-0003rM-BO
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 10:57:59 -0500
Received: from mail02.noris.net ([62.128.1.232]:56997)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>)
id 1tX0Lc-0003rA-7s
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 10:57:58 -0500
Received: from p57b089c5.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([87.176.137.197]
helo=hermia.goebel-consult.de)
by mail02.noris.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim) (envelope-from <h.goebel@HIDDEN>)
id 1tX0La-0006NA-Lf
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:57:54 +0100
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hermia.goebel-consult.de [192.168.110.7])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by hermia.goebel-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4F54665CA
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:57:51 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <438ced5f-5dae-4832-8efd-3243d909fd4c@HIDDEN>
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 16:57:51 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
From: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@HIDDEN>
Content-Language: de-DE, en-US
Autocrypt: addr=h.goebel@HIDDEN; keydata=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Organization: crazy-compilers.com
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re v8 of Add Request-For-Comment process.
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Noris-IP: 87.176.137.197
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
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: -1.6 (-)
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>being late to the discussion, here are my 2 cent. Please
apologize if things have already been discussion and decided.<br>
</p>
<p>Section "How the Process Works", number 2: Is –sequence number
obvious enough? If the GCD is not pushed to the repo right after
creating, other authors need to look at the patches-mailinglist.</p>
<p>Also, if not pushing to the repo just after creating the GCD,
sequence-numbers will be missing if the GCD is withdrawn or
rejected.<br>
</p>
<p>Section "How the Process Works", number 3: I don't understand
"must not be prospective". According to dict.leo.org,
"prospective" translates in German to adjectives like long-sighted
put also to in the future, estimated, likley.</p>
<p>Section "How the Process Works", number 4: It should be states
explicitly that the patch is for/against guix-consensus-documents.
<br>
</p>
<p>Section "Roles", Sponsor: here the term "RFC" is used.</p>
<p>Section "Roles", Sponsor: "is a contributor" and "should be a
contributor". Contributor to the GCD or to Guix? What makes one a
"contributor"? Is the term defined somewhere else, e.g. in the
Guix Manual?</p>
<p>Section "Timelime", Flowshart: Some kind of "declined" is
missing.<br>
</p>
<p>Section "Submission Period": withdraw and can resubmit "possibly
under a new GCD number". Why possibly? What are the rules whether
a new number has to be used?</p>
<p>Section "Submission Period", Withdrawal and Resubmit: Are there
any rules why or when an author may resubmit the GCD? Is feedback
like "The idea is good, but a lot of things popped up during
discussion, so we need revise the GCD in great parts" a case for
this?</p>
<p>Section "Discussion Period": Can the period be extended? What
happens if there is still heavy discussion aber 60 days?</p>
<p>Section "Deliberate period": IMHO "deliberation" is the wrong
term, since the team members send in their votes. I suggest
calling it "Voting Period", even if someone might argue that in
consent based decision making, "deliberation" is the term to use.<br>
</p>
<p>Section "Deliberate period":The 25% are to be counted at which
valuation date? I propose: <br>
</p>
<p>Section "Deliberate period": The sentence "Deliberation aims to
…" should be moved near the beginning of the section.</p>
<p>Section "Deliberate period":Same for "Anyone who is a team
member..."</p>
<p>Section "Deliberate period": "GCD acceptence" and "withdrawal
does not necessarily" should go out of this section into as more
general part. Mayby into "Decision Making" (see my next point on
this).</p>
<p>Section "Deliberate period": IMHO if a vast number of team
members disapprove the proposal it should be taken as rejected.<br>
</p>
<p>Section "Decision Making": should go in front of "Timeline",
since it describes the principle.</p>
<p>Section "Merging": "if previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated":
make clear that the status of the deprecated GCD is to be changed.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p></p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Regards
Hartmut Goebel
| Hartmut Goebel | <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:h.goebel@HIDDEN">h.goebel@HIDDEN</a> |
| <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.crazy-compilers.com">www.crazy-compilers.com</a> | compilers which you thought are impossible |
</pre>
</body>
</html>
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jan 2025 00:48:05 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 10 19:48:05 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40278 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tWPfZ-0001e2-6Y for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 19:48:05 -0500 Received: from mail-qv1-xf43.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::f43]:50289) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>) id 1tWPfX-0001dV-9p for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 19:48:03 -0500 Received: by mail-qv1-xf43.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6dd1b895541so42235906d6.0 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 16:48:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736556477; x=1737161277; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=gqem/CwSssOVXbF5GNFrXR2oOyjyVTJ18fLBZPYOVPo=; b=KdUxWeEFTqQmi0cDGxOucETnYCCMNShW+OiEV3MFcAfzVPSbkxVrS+BWibbZ46DM7l FXumYI+a9uuxDE5KOVmWcBmMY+QLthEONNTAhtX76s9m0Gvi0rr3Q2W82UJW4a1Bm2RY Rr6qVyA1BuAJQFtblzvXYoHUEXJrJcDjE7AozvCtZBjgVm+IX3I7G76dv8qjpY1X2wak AtF1CR0Wvj4E2ntCgsrkQfFa+njLAk4KnjFYXiXtnQYTdtqHtHCX0rJ7lAQwTMuEuh8M 3fMMgFhLFwihrbHdkCb3SSsO5bpVUtKr3V7lUo4tlUStTxQdij1d4q0rpIFAfGNZhTlY S2Vg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736556477; x=1737161277; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent: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=gqem/CwSssOVXbF5GNFrXR2oOyjyVTJ18fLBZPYOVPo=; b=NcbBvR8KwOnKIWotDLj2ihsM04wjz312JKfvWoRelMCmDT9hnKbDzEWIYwbvPIwgZr 7gDPUdx248PkCpQUJD4+kpblRLjGfymc8db1gc9Vxo6ItNzunhtfO3+b6iUbvCxxGswF uWFOJS0mI3TcUEKBWHm/EBsrQnoU3ya4t9uFlzL77CUukRPEs+fsy3f7z2CI0VSKlWTg a1fGy/lV2dq9kD9Z8V2MWzLssYOhigpLsTbzvfs6B+ZuzG0fcR5bJDpVpxjn2VdCc40p vYczX0NtBXbB70oIO8YR9HKMrSeVtofmzq6aoCUGSZyFzlMI3CJA9mBTeFxKDBIWhK/j 3OxA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUI3DDcvrsU6tvJ3902kk9DZXlzGUc4F6/cYfHDhYM+1mTLMiSO+sAnEzzZ6TD7sdq+I6600A==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyU5daqfLxhAhoqjJL/rG62wMWf6+qIbcAa67dKtSSBXpE2Q/yW UCCG4JGw04JBGmFJW1ch8c5Pb0kQTdK8k53UWIMkd3g8Vz84vuCnZbO2G7P5 X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsHxLSew/WPK3hugQFICiy13HR/Gvbu0IbaNT6oCcxLf2q1x2Q7uXejZRRneK0 PjeoYkuKWHcgI3EqygD9DeEXdK+2KMv+WEaLUKLm+mAFt8apNRfmruQA5NYleTV3DQdliQHNNXi o6PzDl7cb/ZkmpvKNAzYhPvhO/oaPFToQt0rvPwacr55ZWkLgJuBHHj4+ELR8NNMBwLckq4Hu/y 2Go8UTXGYbPN7WggSnkanTliFvbYBEsnAUxEtW2s/58N8eUvFr2 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHAeq4YZISXwB5DmpzcDPF+HefzXSEt/cCvMF8kyRfKVo9Zw0+cmD13dIPmUNTL5vGPX53oFQ== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5f8d:0:b0:6d4:4100:75a1 with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6df9b2c50dbmr199300746d6.39.1736556477361; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 16:47:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from gnus ([70.26.179.129]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-6dfad86153asm15097826d6.22.2025.01.10.16.47.55 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Jan 2025 16:47:56 -0800 (PST) From: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87sepqkeji.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:02:25 +0100") References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c75vao7.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hsqfqz.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hrioxe.fsf@HIDDEN> <87wmf3ymua.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sepqkeji.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 19:47:45 -0500 Message-ID: <87tta6fa6m.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Cou?= =?utf-8?Q?rt=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.7 (/) Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: > Well, I know RFC is the usual name for this kind of thing (I also used > RFC when discussing it). Nonetheless, I find nicer to not follow such > =E2=80=9Cconvention=E2=80=9D, as for example Python Enhancement Proposals= (PEP) > does. :-) And the term RFC is already too much overloaded in Guix > mailing list, IMHO. > > In addition, I like =E2=80=99Guix Common Document=E2=80=99 because it exp= resses what > it is: our shared (common) direction. Moreover it echoes with Commons > and somehow the process tries to capture that: what we collectively > want to preserve. Last, pun with mathematical notion of greatest > common divisor (gcd) [1]. To the extent it is important that the term be somewhat self-explanatory, to me the term "Guix Common Document" did not imply that it is a "proposal", nor that it is intended to "change" or "enhance" current implementation in some specific way(s). As with all anecdotal evidence, take this with a grain of salt. IMO, "Guix Change Process", or "Guix Change Proposal", or "Guix Enhancement Proposal" may be more self-evident. --=20 Suhail
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 17:15:38 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 10 12:15:38 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58630 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tWIbg-0005Ai-Nv
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:15:38 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46602)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tWIbd-0005AM-Lp
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:15:35 -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 1tWIbW-0005ym-Rr; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 12:15:26 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=CJJw9VOrmgByYNmp5JOq+KT+9dsEr/5zILrMth0J3F0=; b=HSZoM+vAALDg2ZwgyXto
5ATNNe+LiO5MXshlyRIy7ebHNrt6R1RBkcW9f3XwBNmlvrIuKoZUtmBRvrq8ouga0+uWeuonEQYMl
MFAYue/iuO1LidscWTIaL9X5sKDsm7NsmaOAFbnsrUtygx8oJaD/qoHoreiuglS7+du53Gh6Ldl1x
qgT1NQWcsDjQCrMvOhOZyKUsYUh7/nyP4yzasbSZGL0t3qvTXUQ+M4IemMwOHA0Y41dx4RZ5Z8VQA
WD2phrd/Gn7KZEdVmqqhzvsv28siXbjyxrIzqJkGsDRrewFrnk7SYVD5BHxqwL+SGr9Hgv2sOeDZu
LZmZL6x9fhlstg==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: [PATCH v8] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87jzb3h7ps.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Fri, 10
Jan 2025 00:45:51 +0100")
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87jzb3h7ps.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 18:15:20 +0100
Message-ID: <877c72lhef.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Christopher Baines <mail@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 (---)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Simon and all,
Here=E2=80=99s v8 (based on changes I had made to v6) to account for the ma=
ny
good suggestions that were made in the past few days.
Main changes:
=E2=80=A2 New =E2=80=9CRoles=E2=80=9D section (replacing =E2=80=9CSupport=
ers=E2=80=9D), where =E2=80=9Cteam member=E2=80=9D is
defined.
=E2=80=A2 Mention cancellation when sponsors are not found.
=E2=80=A2 ASCII art for the diagram.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify that it is up to the author(s) to decide when to stop t=
he
discussion period and start the deliberation period, as long as it=E2=
=80=99s
between 30 and 60 days.
=E2=80=A2 Regarding disapproval, change =E2=80=9Cmust have =E2=80=A6=E2=
=80=9D to =E2=80=9Cshould =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D.
As for the name, I was fine with =E2=80=9CRFC=E2=80=9D, I=E2=80=99m fine wi=
th =E2=80=9CGuix Consensus
Document=E2=80=9D (as pukkamustard suggested), but I would rather avoid =E2=
=80=9CGuix
Common Document=E2=80=9D, which IMO fails to convey what this is about.
Find v8 attached and a diff compared to v7, for clarity (?).
I=E2=80=99ll refrain from sending any new version!
BTW, should we start using a version control tool? We have to file a
Savannah support request to rename the repo though, if there=E2=80=99s cons=
ensus
about one of the =E2=80=9CGCD=E2=80=9D names.
Ludo=E2=80=99.
v7-to-v8 diff:
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-patch; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
--- /home/ludo/doc/guix/001-gcd-process.md 2025-01-10 17:47:35.269850711 +0=
100
+++ /home/ludo/doc/guix/001-gcd-process-v2.md 2025-01-10 18:07:43.556236460=
+0100
@@ -1,17 +1,17 @@
-title: Guix Common Document Process
+title: Guix Consensus Document Process
id: 001
status: submitted
discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
-sponsor: ?
-submitted: 2024-12-08
+sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus
+date-submitted: 2024-12-12
date: 2025-01-15
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
---
=20
# Summary
=20
-This document describes the _Guix Common Document_ (GCD) process of the
+This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the
Guix project. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@
Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
GCD first.
=20
-Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require an GCD; examples include:
+Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require a GCD; examples include:
=20
- adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
- fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
@@ -72,9 +72,10 @@
=20
## How the Process Works
=20
-1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-common-document.git #T=
ODO:
+1. Clone
+ https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git .
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
- is a short descriptive name long and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
+ is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD mus=
t not
be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
@@ -89,58 +90,62 @@
=20
Submitted GCD is announced at `info-guix@HIDDEN`.
=20
-## Sponsors
+## Roles
=20
-A sponsor is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project=E2=80=99s
-practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a team
-member. Sponsors do not have to agree with all the points of the GCD
-but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions are a good
-thing for the community.
-
-Sponsors help the author(s) by participating in discussions, amending
-the document as it is being discussed, and acting as timekeepers.
-
-As sponsor, please make sure that all have the time and space for
-expressing their comments. The GCD is about significant changes, thus
-more opinions is better than less.
+ - An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the RFC.
+ Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
+ conclusion.
+
+ - A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
+ below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
+ RFC by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
+ to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
+ timekeepers.
+
+ Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
+ familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommended=
, but
+ not mandatory, to be a team member.
+
+ - A *team member* is the member of a team, as defined by the Guix
+ project in the manual. Currently, the list of teams and their
+ members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
+ repository.
=20
## Timeline
=20
-The lifetime of an GCD is structured into the following recommended
-periods:
+A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
+consisting of several *periods*.
=20
-
=20
-```dot
-digraph "GCD Timeline" {
- submission [label=3D<Submission Period<br />up to 7=C2=A0days>]
- discussion [label=3D<Discussion Period<br />30=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>]
- deliberation[label=3D<Deliberation Period<br />14=C2=A0days>]
- withdrawn [label=3DWithdrawn, shape=3Drectangle]
- accepted [label=3DAccepted, shape=3Drectangle]
-=20=20=20=20
- submission -> discussion
- submission -> withdrawn
- discussion -> deliberation
- deliberation -> withdrawn
- deliberation -> accepted
-=20=20=20=20
- withdrawn -> submission [label=3D"New version"]
-=20=20=20=20
- discussion -> withdrawn
-}
+```
+ +-----------+
+ +- - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------------+
+ : +-----------+ |
+ : ^ |
+ : : |
++--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
+| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
+| (up to 7 days) |-->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days)=
|
++--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
+ |
+ |
+ V
+ +----------+
+ | Accepted |
+ +----------+
```
=20
-The subsections below detail the various stages and their duration.
+The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
=20
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
=20
-Anyone can author and submit an GCD as a regular patch and look for
-sponsor (see below). The GCD is *submitted* once one or more people
-publicly reply =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=80=9D and volunteers to be sponsors; =
the next
-step is the *discussion period*.
+Anyone can author and submit a GCD as a regular patch and look for
+sponsors (see below). The GCD is *submitted* once one or more people
+have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=
=80=9D; it is
+canceled if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
+is the *discussion period*.
=20
-Author(s) may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
+Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
later, possibly under a new GCD number.
=20
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
@@ -148,13 +153,14 @@
Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed; authors are encouraged to
publish updated versions incorporating feedback during the discussion.
=20
-Once the discussion settles, at the latest after 60 days, the author(s)
-publish a final version, leading to the *deliberation period*.
+When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
+of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
+announce the start of the *deliberation period*.
=20
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
=20
-All members of any team of the Guix project can participate in
-deliberation and are encouraged to do so.
+All team members can participate in deliberation and are encouraged to
+do so.
=20
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
@@ -163,9 +169,8 @@
- =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementat=
ion of the
proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementat=
ion of the
- proposal. A team member sending this reply must have actively
- cooperated with for discussing the RFC during the discussion period.
- See =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D.
+ proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made
+ constructive comments during the discussion period.
=20
The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
@@ -174,7 +179,7 @@
Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
below.
=20
-Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is asked
+Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
to contribute to the deliberation. Team members are defined by the
file etc/teams.scm (see =E2=80=9CTeams=E2=80=9D in the manual).
=20
@@ -219,7 +224,8 @@
4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
[GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
-Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html).
+Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html) or (at your option)
+any later version.
=20
## GCD Template
=20
@@ -228,8 +234,8 @@
=20
## Cost of Reverting
=20
-The GCD process described in this documented can be amended by
-subsequent GCDs.
+The GCD process described in this document can be amended by subsequent
+GCDs.
=20
## Drawbacks
=20
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
And v8:
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=001-gcd-process-v2.md
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: PATCH v8
title: Guix Consensus Document Process
id: 001
status: submitted
discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
sponsors: pukkamustard, Ricardo Wurmus
date-submitted: 2024-12-12
date: 2025-01-15
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
---
# Summary
This document describes the _Guix Consensus Document_ (GCD) process of the
Guix project. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
on important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to
weigh in.
# Motivation
Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
keep track of all of them.
The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
=E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the communit=
y at large
and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only be =
reverted at a
high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
- changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
- adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
- changing the channel mechanism;
- changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
deprecation policy, or this very document;
- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.).
# Detailed Design
## When to Follow This Process
The GCD process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, whic=
h include:
- changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
(command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
- big restructuring of packages;
- hard to revert changes;
- significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
- governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
GCD first.
Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require a GCD; examples include:
- adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
- fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
interfaces;
- updating the manual, updating translations;
- changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure
in a user-invisible way.
These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
## How the Process Works
1. Clone
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-consensus-documents.git .
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
is a short descriptive name and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD must=
not
be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
deprecate a previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*:
one or more people who will support the GCD and participate in
discussions by your side (see below).
The GCD is *submitted* once it has at least one sponsor in addition to
the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D below.
Submitted GCD is announced at `info-guix@HIDDEN`.
## Roles
- An *author* is the person or one of the persons submitting the RFC.
Authors bear the responsibility to carry out the process to its
conclusion.
- A *sponsor* is a contributor who, during the submission period (see
below), informs the author(s) that they would like to support the
RFC by participating in discussions, providing constructive comments
to help the author(s), soliciting opinions, and acting as
timekeepers.
Sponsors should be contributors who consider being sufficiently
familiar with the project=E2=80=99s practices; hence it is recommended,=
but
not mandatory, to be a team member.
- A *team member* is the member of a team, as defined by the Guix
project in the manual. Currently, the list of teams and their
members is maintained in the file `etc/teams.scm` in the Guix
repository.
## Timeline
A GCD must follow the process illustrated by the diagram below,
consisting of several *periods*.
```
+-----------+
+- - - - - - ->| Withdrawn |<----------------------+
: +-----------+ |
: ^ |
: : |
+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
| Submission Period | | Discussion Period | | Deliberation Period |
| (up to 7 days) |-->| (30=E2=80=9360 days) |-->| (14 days) =
|
+--------------------+ +---------------------+ +---------------------+
|
|
V
+----------+
| Accepted |
+----------+
```
The subsections below detail the various periods and their duration.
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
Anyone can author and submit a GCD as a regular patch and look for
sponsors (see below). The GCD is *submitted* once one or more people
have volunteered to be sponsors by publicly replying =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=
=80=9D; it is
canceled if no sponsor could be found during that period. The next step
is the *discussion period*.
Authors may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
later, possibly under a new GCD number.
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed; authors are encouraged to
publish updated versions incorporating feedback during the discussion.
When deemed appropriate, between 30 days and 60 days after the start
of the discussion period, the author(s) may publish a final version and
announce the start of the *deliberation period*.
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
All team members can participate in deliberation and are encouraged to
do so.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
- =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementati=
on of the
proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementati=
on of the
proposal. A team member sending this reply should have made
constructive comments during the discussion period.
The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
*withdrawn*.
Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
below.
Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is encouraged
to contribute to the deliberation. Team members are defined by the
file etc/teams.scm (see =E2=80=9CTeams=E2=80=9D in the manual).
GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
the participants consent to its implementation.
Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it
could mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in
the GCD are accepted by the community.
## Decision Making
Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions
that everyone can live with.
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
details, you are encouraged to read
<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
## Merging Final GCDs
Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a committer merges the final GCD
following these steps:
1. filling in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the
`status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
`status` header accordingly);
2. committing everything;
3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
All the GCDs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike
4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
[GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html) or (at your option)
any later version.
## GCD Template
The expected structure of GCDs is captured by the template in the file
`000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown syntax.
## Cost of Reverting
The GCD process described in this document can be amended by subsequent
GCDs.
## Drawbacks
There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more t=
han
it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help
contribution, not an end in itself.
Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices
and notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon,
and solicit opinions of those who remained silent.
## Open Issues
There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
While we want to ensure that technical changes that affect users are
well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become undu=
ly
burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to
maintain moving forward.
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 16:47:54 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 10 11:47:54 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58556 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tWIAs-0003pi-5b for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 11:47:54 -0500 Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([2a01:5b40:0:3006::1]:45370) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tWIAp-0003pF-Vm for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 11:47:52 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:From: Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=NVsaLsjLKKbW2A1DgGd7i4gV1y1j0zfVR/f6LGXqqp4=; b=Q iAgun5y0tx9q+qVfI8FCfQJldALrHbpPBYTjyzhEWD4M6Hu8pbqd6C6xM8ojAcQt1Je72IAHwE2Bw W55kGcCCPkso3Zh1OarPjV12NLQUKZ516Nf8dlfJ1pXOWvIgbKrwIwHWxgllT29WC6Y19SXFDU1Eb zLETKtb7TRgMUDwGvzlBDRQpHNa2WdQ6zLOlcSqRAZEGasuzvI/UhAXToI9DWCuijjeD0DeaNzgI7 C6eKGuxQrwj+d2jtkVyCuhY2iSbuDIITPh7yKdh5hOX7VDayJixIok1P8/f+MuHI0/pCS3Bcs5R+9 MTCRbeLKC/gtmD2n16IFd7siARN0WWvjw==; Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1tWIAj-005rOT-I4; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 17:47:45 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87sepqkeji.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c75vao7.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hsqfqz.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hrioxe.fsf@HIDDEN> <87wmf3ymua.fsf@HIDDEN> <87sepqkeji.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 17:48:57 +0100 Message-ID: <877c721uo6.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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 (-) Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: > Hi No=C3=A9, > > On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 11:39, No=C3=A9 Lopez via Guix-patches via <guix-p= atches@HIDDEN> wrote: > >> Can you explain the reasoning for that name? I don=E2=80=99t think I un= derstand >> what it means. > > Personally, I find =E2=80=99Guix Common Document=E2=80=99 more self-expla= natory than > Request-for-Comments. Because once the proposal is accepted or > withdrawn there is no more request nor comment. ;-) > > Well, I know RFC is the usual name for this kind of thing (I also used > RFC when discussing it). Nonetheless, I find nicer to not follow such > =E2=80=9Cconvention=E2=80=9D, as for example Python Enhancement Proposals= (PEP) > does. :-) And the term RFC is already too much overloaded in Guix > mailing list, IMHO. > > In addition, I like =E2=80=99Guix Common Document=E2=80=99 because it exp= resses what it > is: our shared (common) direction. Moreover it echoes with Commons and > somehow the process tries to capture that: what we collectively want to > preserve. Last, pun with mathematical notion of greatest common divisor > (gcd) [1]. > > Does it make sense? Makes sense, we could add the explanation to the readme :) Thanks, No=C3=A9
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 13:17:55 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 10 08:17:54 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56720 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tWEte-00016h-AP for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:17:54 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55356) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <janneke@HIDDEN>) id 1tWEtb-00016T-QQ for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:17:53 -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 <janneke@HIDDEN>) id 1tWEtQ-0004fe-ET; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:17:41 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=9c7nRMM9aHR/55Z/VN961acHDAAU9Y1s0fVx2fzo7hg=; b=HcvzYD1fk5kX9zGduVLD ITG2NeXnTH/2B7FtJT+zMGAJwyrN2T+CijOhUGiREtWB7LOPYe3bMSJJSycy1H3v+6fe2Mk3/3yJh K/5xLLTf2ttbpgzO+Oz3IldQWtvKpkRUmv+Mpa1026kV8FLmcx0X+Q4iI89/ywG56Aa/Qrrn69MHl gtSv22RtvWSiWYJE+7j92Nvbi79DDRDGcKcflIx9q0E0fCrmcOJE8Z5yu2LKjbMSRQ5+iNj6PDSI2 e3sRjZrL6L3u2jEX2mNQM6RBii9UXK0mr6TLR8jrIVW7Q88UlMZd7tl+B2kFQBp3lOzNhnGBkTGsB 6dZG+SMlmMlXOw==; From: Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process. In-Reply-To: <87y0zikfch.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Fri, 10 Jan 2025 13:45:02 +0100") Organization: AvatarAcademy.nl References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87h667nmdk.fsf@HIDDEN> <87y0zikfch.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Url: http://AvatarAcademy.nl Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:17:03 +0100 Message-ID: <871pxaolkg.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@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: -2.1 (--) Simon Tournier writes: Hi Simon, > On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 08:44, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN> wro= te: > >>> # Motivation [..] >> * to draw more attention to / have important discussions stand out >> more in all the "noise", and guided by [..] > Yes! :-) Great! > >> A drawback could be that it slows >> development down, but for important changes that may be a good thing? > > I would you say yes :-) > > And I would also say it=E2=80=99s a counter measure against =E2=80=9CWhy = wasn't I > consulted=E2=80=9C [1] or some bullet points [2] from the talk that appea= r to me > helpful and that had been inspiration. > > 1: https://youtu.be/m0rakUuPXFM > 2: https://simon.tournier.info/posts/2023-10-30-toward-rfc.html Yes, I tend to agree. Especially improving the chance to get involved is a very good thing. >> The only things that I could suggest is to see if we should make it even >> be more lightweight/nimble as a first version, e.g, require only two >> *persons*, so that two authors could start a submission >> >> The RFC is *submitted* once it has at least one co-author or >> supporter in addition to the initial author(s). > > Ah you mean that the case of =E2=80=99two authors=E2=80=99 does not requi= re a Sponsor*, > right? Ah yes, Possibly I'm splitting hairs here too much. But ISTM that having one author and one sponsor being enough, whereas in the situation where an early sponsor actually contributes to become a second author, they would now have to go look for a third person. Dunno. > *Sponsor: was =E2=80=99Supporter=E2=80=99 but renamed in order to avoid c= onfusion > between supporting the Document before the Discussion Period and > replying =E2=80=99I support=E2=80=99 during the Delibration Period. Noted. Sorry for being sloppy with the terms :) >> or use shorter periods, e.g. >> >> submission[label=3D<Submission Period<br />up to 7=C2=A0days>] >> comments[label=3D<Discussion Period<br />15=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>] >> deliberation[label=3D<Deliberation Period<br />8-14=C2=A0days>] >> >> but I have no strong opinion on these. > > About the Discussion Period, I do not have an opinion. From my > intuition, it appears to be helpful when all have the time and space for > expressing their comments. > > About the Deliberation Period, I think we need to have enough time and 2 > weeks sound the good range based on what we are already doing for patch > review. Indeed, that mathes. I was just thinking about a patch that "just passes the RFC-importance threshold" but could have been applied within a week because it got a lot of review and attention, then someone proposes to create an RFC, and then you're automatically looking at 7+30+14 =3D=3D ~7 weeks. It's a puzzle indeed. I was thinking: if "everyone involved" argees it could be done/decided quicker, policy seems to prevent that. Otoh, that protects the "why wasn't I consulted" problem. So yeah. If nobody else sees the need to make the first iteration more lightweight, I'm happy to try this. Thanks again for your efforts. Greetings, Janneke --=20 Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN> | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com | Avatar=C2=AE https://AvatarAcade= my.com
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 13:02:43 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 10 08:02:43 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56702 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tWEew-0000MM-K1 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:02:42 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x329.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::329]:61851) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tWEeu-0000Ln-9G for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:02:40 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x329.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4368a293339so23586705e9.3 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736514154; x=1737118954; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=T17N0cQIazdnX4LdcrRZ6BRRj5szpobYSZBvTRGrpKI=; b=gfk/hjzi4nUIGgiH2+QCOcy2BnuOpqnVKEAWqGRqEvFwIo28lL59b45LOFcI8ogdxm qMyUXlu/sMl+p2FfwybrgMf3b1kPX9lcfvZsMMQyw8nc3q352cuhvypLSJ+q1Lws/MGl QUJqB8x5O4XqmhdHWZxP+Y6dKSyGRvbNJCh44HXgQEWFkopF1QdF9kZVgB7SewjM7d7I sf7lT20I3++l9dgq5t8xr/GG6PmI5+9NGLuOtbFIpvP4RCncbrEVipOw9XkrASHHcTKe HmTiVcovALsecrsESlcdORXX3FBuW93mrxNukUmdNezV0MwWJNiwii6Hh+UZaE35kFSj Arww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736514154; x=1737118954; 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=T17N0cQIazdnX4LdcrRZ6BRRj5szpobYSZBvTRGrpKI=; b=YS4urgGkCHZquX6T4McZTY+bLawkkElKr2mXncLzV+d9QyRlFTDqJzOlRMfMnwO9XH u0RpHEMiyfxaCkxdSIpce0WO1vtE5OIji++lfhG/wkJMlCEZ8tS4aivllR3+UyFnbgBC 78mDmoCc0fKBvQbeHke6tE3ge7gMZAl6K5i6P0IKw9bDDP6X+l33Dq2Gi0QPuhPnX5qW maQw0Jcmc14HwFF6LwXzEobd80NiJ/Kb+ssXvrwYaunt2+CUiPj2ajiUJNo/pXMs6Knv s9TMYD2rp+E7JHNTHU2MuAASo7sf90FyFegdsIboUUo23NU8L/ACAioRmXnVmnZFDAg4 +fMA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YztUfF57XdZnzxg4Tf+Es69AcW7Buuqr9kw8uoMPPS/du58DAWF 2y4wKqhYVunbHI1wSRc3mzfmYBi8LZxEglNBlWi4lwSkvTwuGUZ2VdP7Nw== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsG3WV7rjsR6+cAE3dM/6uT1VdcvKxO3aK/bBmQq335QYQX6zBeD1Z0EQ4xlu+ 36bpwzm1VwVP4ENKFxQH3KEzB0c3btHtCdLLdshW8xyc2CI9tUoZAY62igWPzx1Vog++oqE6S+j 9Kqa6nBRLpayiFAYbryJ2rw+XqylUb1C5UNj2nkoTO2VU9D/dK4I/O26aMUFIF7FXGlXTJ4I9Xi ghRnFzWagtgvtnZLdeQAXU4GOg9PaoEtYRR/Ua4z7JpLWcfAKRMDKEv3c2hNr4E7wneIbMt8TOX LavsRdaheRGkPeVJrmRRDJViFUNsxDLxY8y1jXmvow== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF8F3rz942o4PbX021EOwMVWfK6pykKUnY20PFFIcEUzbbJrO7Qp2TtsZF8zDVaxC5Y0dS63g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3b08:b0:436:18e5:6917 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e255ffd6mr108672895e9.0.1736514153991; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-47.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr. [194.254.61.47]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e2e8bea5sm85825905e9.31.2025.01.10.05.02.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:33 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Cour?= =?utf-8?Q?t=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87wmf3ymua.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c75vao7.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hsqfqz.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hrioxe.fsf@HIDDEN> <87wmf3ymua.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:02:25 +0100 Message-ID: <87sepqkeji.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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 No=C3=A9, On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 11:39, No=C3=A9 Lopez via Guix-patches via <guix-pat= ches@HIDDEN> wrote: > Can you explain the reasoning for that name? I don=E2=80=99t think I und= erstand > what it means. Personally, I find =E2=80=99Guix Common Document=E2=80=99 more self-explana= tory than Request-for-Comments. Because once the proposal is accepted or withdrawn there is no more request nor comment. ;-) Well, I know RFC is the usual name for this kind of thing (I also used RFC when discussing it). Nonetheless, I find nicer to not follow such =E2=80=9Cconvention=E2=80=9D, as for example Python Enhancement Proposals (= PEP) does. :-) And the term RFC is already too much overloaded in Guix mailing list, IMHO. In addition, I like =E2=80=99Guix Common Document=E2=80=99 because it expre= sses what it is: our shared (common) direction. Moreover it echoes with Commons and somehow the process tries to capture that: what we collectively want to preserve. Last, pun with mathematical notion of greatest common divisor (gcd) [1]. Does it make sense? Cheers, simon 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greatest_common_divisor
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 13:02:42 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 10 08:02:42 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56700 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tWEew-0000MF-5Z for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:02:42 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x432.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::432]:50616) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tWEet-0000Lm-P7 for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:02:40 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-x432.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-386329da1d9so1092981f8f.1 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736514154; x=1737118954; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=wPjESG5iXgrps1YjePrZP9SIludUgp68ICAq0VObtek=; b=Oc1r7oeK1JMd4IJ7aYdVIDbkfYNIuvEitzMoD2+rRCUgkn3W4tpbRfgxZergrH9k8q EENxCQvg5grfONnAlPVYTTbiVZuiEWMSzxNkVZ4qyY9thvuBBSyYbkM0qjY5CA7GxZci AgtHLIJAMm/lV2Wjv4uITy89xXd9Q41wD6G7tM9EzJ2aJsPdVVTigmIG/bPnF0lmbto4 lFxg37WX3Mi4M3U15zoukkjyLgsi6NvEISX4ZYiGDYL+wNkmi2PNTr2PXF5cKXLdAigr GOUysl5kIOFAQYhEyRr9MvV/1Gffrc4BiuL0uzqwVSO62Lwlh3zuxnoIFDP1H8MoiURh Qung== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736514154; x=1737118954; 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=wPjESG5iXgrps1YjePrZP9SIludUgp68ICAq0VObtek=; b=BAjhED9LpNrJYltL3HH/PJa5hMVy5+6OYb73SQI02CGaoRbdI8ImR5/dOlL1cQo15i wiC8BZT0H95XbllQaRLkUZx6Fy2OVNX0tewYrdyu6wH2zmU6jm4NLAxSXteStCStU2gZ YDJC3DVIaz6xHBWW+bu0B5wuLxuU+b2KnjaicR/lCfvXQ9bOfV++tHS+aLIiouEZNkTc x3UpMbqECu33+wg/3TeFPW8HP3DG+B0KGRewyPneTOc6AjwfnttIqIS6r8X4O9FkdauH lDY5FFV0UUi6RXYf7gCT1SEBIzHWW14VVELn6jNFPOdrlJbXOFFtXCBpZcGqZ7MlmvES wc/Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVaJ7xNSxYTmOkAo3lm30qN1GvHrxao2uSlY6/K0mT+Z/QaXhHxFBCpQW16LLRi3bX8GcVAww==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx0W7BL6Q9oCw1aD7Th1SQDdW/8+w990BUoQE8TJTg9dBG6k5O7 lBPYvqoFv4JZzzvz9jNHCTw2Gm+OdY4keB06zRZtl/v/8HHBJV7CkvnGLg== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncthiCoc6Qpb7bPSrVYlRUgVIab82DotUnhiRZpu8DdZJcR4pim6kNQEpOoaZRv 1mB5YRKhQLkhILxyPOFjPyt6QoQwV1pAIl5CrhEIx6QHsJzELHC5mZpm67aZ4JF+K7zfKNzUYG5 X/doPXwvWRN7sHsxThPuEKXQIbz8VyuVQXZHGfcbW9KIqWvLI+PSo+svbRFxbBOIyhaHSdQaEjx y6cp5f4GUb6SQACZRj72tC1Td+QfNbsJyJqjDSo5vy0/vfy3i3OO1b4bE87WWJXLBfPqZlxo7BO JVarVkE2BiMAr3NoWQW9rqqvvG8Ttm3LC/9OFblN4Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGN+WbPqSCe2zsXsEJ8lOBBO9U4LPx0mISF8q9m0uzvWmbXYQsDsslENwyydL7mi9lLqzHsBw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:47c4:0:b0:385:f69a:7e5f with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38a87308ae0mr12079747f8f.38.1736514153083; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-40.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr. [194.254.61.40]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38a8e320329sm4498521f8f.0.2025.01.10.05.02.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:32 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process. In-Reply-To: <87h667nmdk.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87h667nmdk.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 13:45:02 +0100 Message-ID: <87y0zikfch.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: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 Janneke, On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 08:44, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN> wrote: >> # Motivation > > Am I right that the main purpose/intent is (not trying to twist anyone's = words) [...] > * to draw more attention to / have important discussions stand out > more in all the "noise", and guided by [...] > * a collective decision on what "important" is? Yes! :-) > A drawback could be that it slows > development down, but for important changes that may be a good thing? I would you say yes :-) And I would also say it=E2=80=99s a counter measure against =E2=80=9CWhy wa= sn't I consulted=E2=80=9C [1] or some bullet points [2] from the talk that appear = to me helpful and that had been inspiration. 1: https://youtu.be/m0rakUuPXFM 2: https://simon.tournier.info/posts/2023-10-30-toward-rfc.html > The only things that I could suggest is to see if we should make it even > be more lightweight/nimble as a first version, e.g, require only two > *persons*, so that two authors could start a submission > > The RFC is *submitted* once it has at least one co-author or > supporter in addition to the initial author(s). Ah you mean that the case of =E2=80=99two authors=E2=80=99 does not require= a Sponsor*, right? *Sponsor: was =E2=80=99Supporter=E2=80=99 but renamed in order to avoid con= fusion between supporting the Document before the Discussion Period and replying =E2=80=99I support=E2=80=99 during the Delibration Period. > or use shorter periods, e.g. > > submission[label=3D<Submission Period<br />up to 7=C2=A0days>] > comments[label=3D<Discussion Period<br />15=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>] > deliberation[label=3D<Deliberation Period<br />8-14=C2=A0days>] > > but I have no strong opinion on these. About the Discussion Period, I do not have an opinion. From my intuition, it appears to be helpful when all have the time and space for expressing their comments. About the Deliberation Period, I think we need to have enough time and 2 weeks sound the good range based on what we are already doing for patch review. Thanks for the comments. Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 13:02:42 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 10 08:02:42 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56698 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tWEev-0000MC-EA
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:02:42 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::334]:42443)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tWEet-0000Lk-E1
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:02:40 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4361b6f9faeso13147385e9.1
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736514153; x=1737118953; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=odlBT8GuC5ZaEeLvZ7oVylGsCMTT5vH2HFQXoWaoG2A=;
b=BaF/afsovMfWX3IWCk9311/q+DgBY0oOH2hg7kIahtPhQL4qvq5bS9IEyetmvvdtEE
JPyb4tMdAmMJJMg9Ly6JJC8J6T5WKjy3sej4NanDSUaK/DsQ/Hgw2H5uQVx/D3NiqcAg
gv4CNMLdPwXMp+5+hKmllVGzQFsEMwcttjihiKXfOzEnGx+IDqHfMICBVP7ghfZroZsV
DW0OLUfBAZes6GB0oknc09Zc8Zqmkd6kRmEauUkqXxpnUo1TbpWeeQx8EaCxO1Q28Ws6
RqL5RamVt0uG5p+tlfcm2Jum90ZnNWi1K21ldZiGYl7HqIqm5aM+PNzSPiRJCsxc/gZ6
4U4g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736514153; x=1737118953;
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=odlBT8GuC5ZaEeLvZ7oVylGsCMTT5vH2HFQXoWaoG2A=;
b=MjhlStXYUo17J7jlkKnx3JsBfzQuQ7l9vpg+rHAW9WXJqrwnBtnhhxNUspey+76hBH
VQtANERy1XuM21vIi1O/D9ciUYVbmewVIP4IF59idFc0vljyrb9SII8ZcD+4Ptq6y4OJ
J80TR01v1lebbrdBpydNIskBfEi0ApMS86biu0AxBpBgu9LmsRJc1zVsIeDYKr5vn8XI
5mqWqsyaovuWhssHSnN4hx2XAfsQWvN20NKFh+16BfDD6RxFeKA6oZkKlHKTFUI0cHj0
GKkjAnJlOtdUE1anz9WKAJJ7NvVJOlDZxHkAzS5WTvcARCgxs2WJPMG/3SfiB1gj8dxw
eBjQ==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCUW5/5NpJ39DdIdbqt2+H0Pa+DeAuhoI7k/y9m8pH8JFLu59NvqgN7dSTLq00E5vTsGwMqlKA==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxP4KtrbPKeslVAL3t9J0eHIrLpJQwf/8lL1Zj+HaKVchiuFrMC
upA19k+S+yikW0Q+QLlW6qX3hDj9yFbAUAP5uF/6lIPGfoDgdQoB
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncu+xj0S2ptx1UVXJsODoFgc2efXP/nry8UfRdITQVTWDxiZVgVTy6zCMOzzKYv
maF2gBt+M6Cx72o7ojCSdfK3AsH283DGqwJ/7C2i7QiWAqEECmURSf4pVg/1BrGsLgMAAC+rR5P
QBXmd9QIH84pFKkrxDlulv+O3asDSSoiP5xhj2TyjWCQ/HdADFz+ct+KztFjOv59WJqC2PmOBFq
c49EYk99o5fG3h/TZwadYN+l9ulMat9dSwNcdfVIlcoVSOh6hPmPpt6k0A2bfuhFoWDJNOgdrA/
vWfAXOLI8N9nRH/wFuncy8ebXaO3stIb/6Ejwft2fg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG7muwI3RnkxSvGyRCA3YqEAYS2w24J0ia0lgJU3RZA6Zx3ARO27+A/e0rkkBR6vlCnYCBmjg==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:5918:b0:436:185f:dfae with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-436e881e681mr56046455e9.6.1736514152195;
Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-45.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr.
[194.254.61.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-436dcceb374sm91977795e9.0.2025.01.10.05.02.31
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:02:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=
<ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
In-Reply-To: <878qrjh56c.fsf@wireframe>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
<87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <878qrjh56c.fsf@wireframe>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 13:25:08 +0100
Message-ID: <8734hqluu3.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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@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 Thu, 09 Jan 2025 at 16:40, Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN> wrote:
> Is 'no one disagrees' =3D=3D 'no one replies with "I disapprove"'? It wou=
ld
> be nicer if there were more explicit alignment in the words used to make
> that clearer, if that is, in fact, the intended case. Perhaps
> literally... e.g. ... (2) if no one declares "I disapprove".
I hope it is clarified with v7 [1]:
The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
*withdrawn*.
WDYT?
Maybe, =C2=AB (2) if no one declares "I disapprove". =C2=BB seems even clea=
rer?
> Obviously, one can and should declare their reservations as part of the
> discussion that lead up to that point! Although maybe "I accept" should
> come with the option to declare formal outstanding concerns?
Well, that=E2=80=99s the distinction between =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D an=
d =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, no?
Somehow, the idea with =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D is =E2=80=9CI think it=E2=
=80=99s the good direction
although I have these concerns X and Y but I can with live all that=E2=80=
=9D.
Well, I think these concerns are captured during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Pe=
riod=E2=80=9D
and they should be included in the section =E2=80=9CDrawback=E2=80=9D or =
=E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D.
WDYT?
> Similarly "I disaprove" should not come out of nowhere; it should be
> clear why, and perhaps worth having an option to note that in the call
> for consensus at the end of the Deliberation Period?
I agree. Does this wording v7 [1]:
- =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the impl=
ementation of the
proposal. A team member sending this reply must have actively
cooperated with for discussing the RFC during the discussion peri=
od.
See =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D.
answer to your comment? In addition, =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D sec=
tion
contains:
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these conce=
rns
are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating me=
mber
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternat=
ives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status=
quo.
Therefore, =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D cannot come out of nowhere becaus=
e the person
who disapproves must comment during the =E2=80=9CDiscussion Period=E2=80=9D=
on the why.
That=E2=80=99s said, do you suggest that the reply =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=
=80=9D during the
=E2=80=9CDeliberating Period=E2=80=9D should come with a summary about why?
And such summary would be then included in the Document with the state
of =E2=80=99widthdrawn=E2=80=99.
> I also wonder if there is a supermajority of "I accept" over "I support"
> this maybe should raise some sort of red flag calling into question the
> proposal... as that is a very weak consensus and perhaps cause for
> concern.
Good point. Maybe this is the same as above about having these concerns
written down in the final document under a dedicated section as
=E2=80=9CDrawback=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9COpen Issues=E2=80=9D. WDYT?
> All that said, I am a latecomer to this process... so take it however is
> most helpful! Overall, it looks quite good to my eyes.
Thank you for your comments.
Cheers,
simon
1: [bug#74736] [PATCH v7] Add Guix Common Document process.
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Fri, 10 Jan 2025 00:45:51 +0100
id:87jzb3h7ps.fsf@HIDDEN
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/87jzb3h7ps.fsf@HIDDEN
https://yhetil.org/guix/87jzb3h7ps.fsf@HIDDEN
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 10:38:09 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 10 05:38:09 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56502 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tWCP3-0001vy-8c for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:38:09 -0500 Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([2a01:5b40:0:3006::1]:46562) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tWCP0-0001vI-Qd for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 05:38:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:From: Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ud2VBj0hp0Vm6e1bP/5+A0MNzADOqZAo4b66Y+88f3w=; b=w p+XAFm0mfWXXc2hlFiKIyl4RJn6YUX/IYFhZJSXk3PwvaZf9QERaRZHCB2kBXxTNxEEcxwLbAIbo9 PdOy7Dg7ywQAzkWUS2jvFEfVlu8fV/99Ye2vExwEC5mChrRvoGiEUF0Evg9V5jvr+GOA2PTYOfZXa duxRY0eE2nSNYI2hQcYi+lCSJv2mhqji53X7kdoTeGH+88bCXOz4SjZMsXTIppcoGvVSp65IsDWS5 DBGdi8uB4ny0g01XdXMH30aWUPMIHKmf89XWbz76g1F8kz86BK/jCGbge5BOR7usAWzoFPCOETu48 aDgPnglcozSBfp9mu+DpakAqPyI8POYGQ==; Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1tWCOu-003TPm-2y; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 11:38:00 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <8734hrioxe.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c75vao7.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hsqfqz.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hrioxe.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 11:39:25 +0100 Message-ID: <87wmf3ymua.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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 (-) Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: > Hi Ludo, > > On Thu, 09 Jan 2025 at 14:27, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote: >> Repository created! >> >> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix/requests-for-comments.git/ > > I like the idea of =E2=80=99Guix Common Document=E2=80=99 (GCD) instead of > Request-For-Comment (RFC). Do you think it would be possible to rename > this repository before it we start to effectively it? > > Cheers, > simon Hi Simon, Can you explain the reasoning for that name? I don=E2=80=99t think I under= stand what it means. Thanks, No=C3=A9
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 07:45:17 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 10 02:45:17 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56275 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tW9hl-0002Jg-6E
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 02:45:17 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49982)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <janneke@HIDDEN>) id 1tW9hj-0002JC-3U
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 02:45:16 -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 <janneke@HIDDEN>)
id 1tW9ha-0003oj-MY; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 02:45:06 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=EDhdulB9tA+ElAhPfPPbVL1XS78FW3XSCrDLyS0z1Y8=; b=XneaVpw8N53mS9c1kTvT
znG06tnyE/ClC2BZ1S7pLcHTuZzjptEUY3aNFCw5/AdOZdU2sNXOBwYtc4dw7EJfJspBy5VlUr4xR
s5kbXuUnf0jHJ7E2kLiYWT04xoLjGs4W+YWg4h+BXys8FV+/HUvQy0NXpptSiMJi62KxD5ZUJXKbi
jU6wu08FFQwe9MlYe7b8imDhYvBtfBt6bPFKCXKIavCIex58+V0oDLsS49MQueViro9+fVnTiThEz
BzSpBo1T0tHjiw65FWWrzfEvuER/sCJOhAqp7riLoZlotRQreKaCXSkaYFuxchh4w7NsPiw2Oqdrl
W4gNvcBRrQEDQw==;
From: Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
In-Reply-To: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=
=?utf-8?Q?=22's?= message of "Mon, 06 Jan 2025 23:29:21 +0100")
Organization: AvatarAcademy.nl
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
<87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
X-Url: http://AvatarAcademy.nl
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:44:55 +0100
Message-ID: <87h667nmdk.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (---)
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes:
Hello,
> As proposed before, here=E2=80=99s a reworked version based on v5. The i=
ntent
> is to keep the spirit and process unchanged compared to v5, while making
> the document a bit more concise (239 lines, v5 was 322), improving
> consistency for key words, hopefully improving wording, fixing
> grammatical issues, and adding Markdown ornaments where appropriate.
[..]
> Thoughts?
> # Motivation
Am I right that the main purpose/intent is (not trying to twist anyone's wo=
rds)
> Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
> review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
> does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
> keep track of all of them.
* to draw more attention to / have important discussions stand out
more in all the "noise", and guided by
> The RFC process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
> =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the commun=
ity at large
> and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
> discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
* a collective decision on what "important" is?
So, in effect a "noise" filter / focus mechanism for the most important
changes. That seems like a very good idea to me!
> ## Drawbacks
>
> There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more=
than
> it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to he=
lp
> contribution, not an end in itself.
I have no personal experience with RFC processes and this seems
lightweight enough to begin with. A drawback could be that it slows
development down, but for important changes that may be a good thing?
Other than that I see only advantages, well done.
The only things that I could suggest is to see if we should make it even
be more lightweight/nimble as a first version, e.g, require only two
*persons*, so that two authors could start a submission
The RFC is *submitted* once it has at least one co-author or
supporter in addition to the initial author(s).
or use shorter periods, e.g.
submission[label=3D<Submission Period<br />up to 7=C2=A0days>]
comments[label=3D<Discussion Period<br />15=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>]
deliberation[label=3D<Deliberation Period<br />8-14=C2=A0days>]
but I have no strong opinion on these.
[..]
> 2. Copy `0000-template.md` to `00XY-short-name.md` where `short-name`
> is a short descriptive name long and `XY` is the sequence number.
^
"long" typo?
Greetings,
Janneke
--=20
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@HIDDEN> | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org
Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com | Avatar=C2=AE https://AvatarAcade=
my.com
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jan 2025 00:40:59 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 19:40:59 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55523 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tW359-0008Hy-12 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 19:40:59 -0500 Received: from cascadia.aikidev.net ([173.255.214.101]:38968) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <vagrant@HIDDEN>) id 1tW357-0008Hi-Ab for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 19:40:57 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=debian.org; s=1.vagrant.user; t=1736469648; bh=f9r7ujw5KSX1++gk79hi0giqhv4h6Q0wo0OoLG5jqlw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=ML9L9nx3Fw3UtyWLnEN03mCCxvAiKBAsuWFCl48n3MaQHlEbNDAfJJ/j7s1iT5lTb NBzmVwIhp2xrwRWLwXxXaAu4NDaMqOyNKn76mJelfLLU7475STcvjxci4IVDzRm61S aWy5flOyEMY9OSI/iW9LNsgqaVximllXr9L0HLiXQsCj8mRth3eWaYbF/S75juOlUD F8ksn2Ez876Adj/pLnRemLGuN4rupCN0S8o4BsuVx8L8lcknAPLZeIDb40Y1tN6RPD 67WrJ0EPiODB3bXgiB6qterk+TJ6jyBBdn7bTu+YvDHwnwVRFdDdHsBSIqa4kycjg/ WrxRWRchRTg1A== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:21:7:77:0:50]) by cascadia.aikidev.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CEA134F89; Thu, 9 Jan 2025 16:40:48 -0800 (PST) From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@HIDDEN> To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process. In-Reply-To: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 16:40:43 -0800 Message-ID: <878qrjh56c.fsf@wireframe> 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: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 Overall, this seems quite good, nice work all! I do have one specific comment... though I am a latecomer to this discussion! On 2025-01-06, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > ### Deliberation Period (14 days) > > All members of any team of the Guix project can participate in > deliberation and are encouraged to do so. > > Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send > one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the RFC: > > - =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal); > - =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementa= tion of the > proposal; > - =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementa= tion of the > proposal. A team member sending this reply must have actively > proposed alternative solutions during the discussion period. > > The RFC is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a > reply, and (2) no one disagrees. In other cases, the RFC is > *withdrawn*. Is 'no one disagrees' =3D=3D 'no one replies with "I disapprove"'? It would be nicer if there were more explicit alignment in the words used to make that clearer, if that is, in fact, the intended case. Perhaps literally... e.g. ... (2) if no one declares "I disapprove". ... Well, two points, apparently, now that I got the simple one out of the way... :) In other consensus settings I have on occasion declared something that is effectively "I accept, but I disapprove" or maybe more descriptively "I accept, with reservations" e.g. not agreeing with the decision but not severely enough that it should not move forward. You might not expect to get much help with implementation from such a person, though! I guess again, it comes to word alignment ... "I disapprove" sounds rather soft, compared to the effects (e.g. blocking further progress or sending it back to the proverbial drawing board). "I accept" sounds rather positive, despite the possibility of some potential discomfort with the decision... Obviously, one can and should declare their reservations as part of the discussion that lead up to that point! Although maybe "I accept" should come with the option to declare formal outstanding concerns? Similarly "I disaprove" should not come out of nowhere; it should be clear why, and perhaps worth having an option to note that in the call for consensus at the end of the Deliberation Period? Eeesh. Three points! I also wonder if there is a supermajority of "I accept" over "I support" this maybe should raise some sort of red flag calling into question the proposal... as that is a very weak consensus and perhaps cause for concern. All that said, I am a latecomer to this process... so take it however is most helpful! Overall, it looks quite good to my eyes. live well, vagrant --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQRlgHNhO/zFx+LkXUXcUY/If5cWqgUCZ4BsiwAKCRDcUY/If5cW qn/2AQDS0ISyEgn6dn73EqpRe0/ICD6LjF1R1Or/XYizvKFlZgEAuGKzrvlcis5q 2LXJmuPEtjAQ7973T6yAUBMY9loWsQk= =fWow -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 23:56:55 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 18:56:55 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55417 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tW2OV-0006D5-AC for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:56:55 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::336]:55605) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tW2OO-0006C3-A2 for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:56:48 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4361dc6322fso11220295e9.3 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736467002; x=1737071802; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Gh6MvRJS2FFPwgZ2hRV1w2GTak+tO2LuufN6Q9KzKus=; b=Xf9PalpD8gfae6ey+mLxuq0vU8r4tWBYygdoqMMIUfj7aAUZ6BHB4MqFxzXvOEW/xK TCvnh6TEhIjURos7UpCrTYBKCKMuVKIY6T9yqb8oBQlvwIBPku5AgAt3wrsfzbIpoycG oaVGi4FzUgN64UbQ9TG+sWQIr4N8PmgVKkqtLyScVg0aucrnPH8xHBs/yogb0HRrdZHW 9pSXoIVOX6Edu1/z+5Rrc3jubudkf+MlSw1ZJ+igZgW/mpW24k4ItwMJonEjse8a7Ted IrsBPhnYqdQQh76a3k9IPz4i8XdcMd4xC9muMnTHPydMwo9dIPtjGKKCLOvPvUISooti 1MxA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736467002; x=1737071802; 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=Gh6MvRJS2FFPwgZ2hRV1w2GTak+tO2LuufN6Q9KzKus=; b=SaF6fN5PsL0t+ZjYn4MWzjPlBHtp5Mr36W93Eu/+pYSvQO6h7c1qcfUIVEZsuED4OE mHma6aRFUlILldcUGfoxKtnCrWYzOIxlCEJ04tqtACs6hpqkbgAMr2BPEP6fpOtlik7+ t7sgvMnx02bdaZeweOtKJgGaAoNJ0gmF1NGyhrlQ5s53YEi0AhSkNCmm5TLrOSNMo2fS lKzDxcPIcwMgLLJrGklnl/1VjGDMGOJGWmp69W6UOuq1OOt1JVCZ2f70dxR77fDuOsHG S0+pGXThRGk2lUeBvYj/2AwgDJDddzchO03lmSuP21HeoTsHwrKs8iorwDmxNhfr273g 7R5A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXMzEslWKXUOacogA9gBaV+hMN2KGTz+MkLp2eDjFXk1wFcVQhQRo3hdDI1vm3vHA8+kOLdgQ==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzbJcvS5IwvbUCDfWyHS7Jj1qLCm8p6h+oUjEIWBguRX94O2qyK /qr2lBTearOKf0Fs/sd39gMuNRiHN5lDnB/WP4mOFKtpXN6ej/9kd22lSA== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncu/T9lgzdKLprMW2shgiPIOy6V/SB5p85gSEtOWqqjOt3uBIa2svzBcpM53/MQ XtAF2ORyrUbZxXVDjCcnnRMDzleqJ4KzibsZukh05olT21msj/AEPMGmVOE6YCNDy5rP0Cbgdxe fRvLL1gQn/Aml97lluJQ0mjSMjz+hmGf++cxoqT0g3+E0tINt4feXaSUiNiUz0C6c1Ae3XQvlam fdEyjyMmf+d2ur3X7ED9Wdw2HIWKpFB/Sej4AQmSHewIGGk5XRIilM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG15/fG/CA55418waUmxcfkh4DaRw/CWP6q+TVH+fPnjejLZvqg/FQfCiKhgnjqIXsmbKr6oA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1384:b0:436:1c04:aa8e with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e26bdac1mr91245455e9.16.1736467002137; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:f526:4f2e:d573:8d5c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-436dd15766fsm49597975e9.2.2025.01.09.15.56.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:41 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <871pxbobxg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87seps3qm8.fsf@HIDDEN> <871pxbobxg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 00:56:31 +0100 Message-ID: <87h667h780.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: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 Thu, 09 Jan 2025 at 23:32, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote: > Yeah, I=E2=80=99m split between Dot and ASCII art=E2=80=A6 Heh me too. Although the dot provides a bit more information via the name of the nodes. Bah I don=E2=80=99t know. > I=E2=80=99ll send v7 tomorrow. I have sent a v7 integrating various comments. Feel free to adjust with a v8 if I am missing something. Thank you, almost there I hope. :-) Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 23:56:55 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 18:56:55 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55415 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tW2OU-0006D3-DB
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:56:55 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x32b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32b]:47185)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tW2OM-0006Bs-4A
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:56:47 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x32b.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4361fe642ddso16211595e9.2
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736467000; x=1737071800; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to
:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=rbRj0cz9IfoNCwoM+/ndSulfc23EUvkmGHmJihWWA1o=;
b=S5nG1tI8pnOioQJtYNLF0f2xSD5w5E+Fbh7/9JJvqQX+pBkTdkx5ym9yP1qb4Fgex+
PJH0cAbaLpL2+HFdrqJBqxqfXuMukcpF3q8HLejuRXdwvwXCMunGHHz1yil84YMApRyG
WRN66M1epb4tRZ6YayOBOOeNchUC/fkr9YsR6GIE6mgtXD3UrxPU74Ml2cyBzNMseNMd
tTkN9lJBvbp7R8dizcLplay9HNKrUXFzQVeT/ukw7muuEkLSQ1een/5Na/TlncN9rgEt
/iyILoX9f80dVCD/dYPJrTr2MKabN0OWzuMxXs7pljgOkHUQ9Mm3o1tJ9vCKKjz93dRn
9Pdg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736467000; x=1737071800;
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=rbRj0cz9IfoNCwoM+/ndSulfc23EUvkmGHmJihWWA1o=;
b=sd7gSlSsXCzkg5vG2ElCmfU+0CaowPu92/Ytepqj+TrSsHKLT6ApDLf52GjOLRmQ1V
Xf6pn+MV7QTXE9qy8YeekYn84l8BPj0foZ6GHFZomNMwoxf2i8uvo47coGkjr3XZ9t2T
vcvzPXe0CjqB7MoAdwecvV1B2d4teHMW4Zryzx4jXM7/ufFDufcjHKCKbRddRIOzlz5u
ptvM134SxlLMzQfHwzGQou7EZUoiuJcRXGJ98C0Tlv1h3DV1EBJL/9DB8N4gzksWaUQE
MfyiWBNRAv3HdFzKlczZ9rZxFZzIYVaZu58lP/VIdUP3A1k9K3xBWt9thXI+N4gRjeBz
h9Pw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCWVCIEWz6FBivQ7Nl7SgKwSYjwBrnUfW8vQm8X+7Zk/anPmHBLyCRJqLA6rI76EeRL4FyNQ2Q==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwmUPR28AWzvyTEzOYKEtM6xalvE/wmV7Ikyh/E/k/tB3g5GHV9
z8Ai1OH+Nzy6pKcPH+N6naPX3ya2X4JodUrE7Eo2o7JGnZMsooVR
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnct8Cd6CRiE2Kz4/OUqezalV+SrohEDNVT+TiURwqZ+DVahWQBCjjALoENnHY8B
QI5qIfzNqgF7cYVn5EK9s0KG/5DzD1+25GuOjrnxjdVj98d9UI5fZFiL0txNLcZ7o3GjH4tj52T
7DyXj3veXkvUTZwQe7PV8nJH1v0rcasndi6WhB1Val0kHRnY82fTCo+8A153Y+h0NbkKGuy+ctA
sA99JVQjbVLQpISmjZDGkU923tA8IRK6T3gTALuJBgqptw6p6djWmk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG2EUFAJTmhcSgb/g0lvKLdQ/CcOP3mDOmRGcuDnT+pwHV8Qla9Cs2IK6WLGHX+JvnTynkdIA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2a2:b0:38a:8906:6b66 with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a89066f45mr7879237f8f.38.1736466999748;
Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:f526:4f2e:d573:8d5c])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a8e4b80c9sm2970356f8f.84.2025.01.09.15.56.38
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:39 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#74736] [PATCH v7] Add Guix Common Document process.
In-Reply-To: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 00:45:51 +0100
Message-ID: <87jzb3h7ps.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@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
Hi,
Based on v6 and integrating various comments. Changes:
=E2=80=A2 Instead of =E2=80=9CSupporter=E2=80=9D, the rename is =E2=80=9CS=
ponsor=E2=80=9D.
=E2=80=A2 Instead of Request-for-Comments (RFC), the rename is Guix Common
Document (GCD).
=E2=80=A2 Fix header: id and SPDX-License-Identifier, adjust sponsor and d=
ate.
=E2=80=A2 Section =E2=80=9CHow the Process Works=E2=80=9D, point 2. adjust=
000-template.md in
agreement with XYZ. Mention =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D and inf=
o-guix.
=E2=80=A2 Section =E2=80=9CSponsor=E2=80=9D: Add paragraph mentioning the =
role of sponsor.
=E2=80=A2 dot graph: Replace =E2=80=99comments=E2=80=99 by =E2=80=99discus=
sion=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=99final=E2=80=99 by
=E2=80=99accepted=E2=80=99.
=E2=80=A2 Section =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D: tweak paragraph.
=E2=80=A2 Section =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D: tweak =E2=80=9CI =
disapprove=E2=80=9D paragraph; Add
paragraph about deliberating member.
=E2=80=A2 Fix trailing dot and replace ornaments by syntax although orname=
nts
sound better to my French. ;-)
Please proofread and comment. :-)
WDYT?
Cheers,
simon
--
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/markdown; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=001-gcd-process.md
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: 001-gcd-process.md
title: Guix Common Document Process
id: 001
status: submitted
discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
sponsor: ?
submitted: 2024-12-08
date: 2025-01-15
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
---
# Summary
This document describes the _Guix Common Document_ (GCD) process of the
Guix project. The GCD process is intended to provide a consistent and
structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
on important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to
weigh in.
# Motivation
Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
keep track of all of them.
The GCD process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
=E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the communit=
y at large
and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only be =
reverted at a
high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
- changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
- adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
- changing the channel mechanism;
- changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
deprecation policy, or this very document;
- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.).
# Detailed Design
## When to Follow This Process
The GCD process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, whic=
h include:
- changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
(command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
- big restructuring of packages;
- hard to revert changes;
- significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
- governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
GCD first.
Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require an GCD; examples include:
- adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
- fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
interfaces;
- updating the manual, updating translations;
- changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure
in a user-invisible way.
These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
## How the Process Works
1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/guix-common-document.git #TO=
DO:
2. Copy `000-template.md` to `XYZ-short-name.md` where `short-name`
is a short descriptive name long and `XYZ` is the sequence number.
3. Write your GCD following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The GCD must=
not
be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
deprecate a previously-accepted GCD, it must explicitly say so.
4. Submit the GCD as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
5. Announce your GCD at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *sponsors*:
one or more people who will support the GCD and participate in
discussions by your side (see below).
The GCD is *submitted* once it has at least one sponsor in addition to
the author(s). See =E2=80=9CSubmission Period=E2=80=9D below.
Submitted GCD is announced at `info-guix@HIDDEN`.
## Sponsors
A sponsor is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project=E2=80=99s
practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a team
member. Sponsors do not have to agree with all the points of the GCD
but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions are a good
thing for the community.
Sponsors help the author(s) by participating in discussions, amending
the document as it is being discussed, and acting as timekeepers.
As sponsor, please make sure that all have the time and space for
expressing their comments. The GCD is about significant changes, thus
more opinions is better than less.
## Timeline
The lifetime of an GCD is structured into the following recommended
periods:
```dot
digraph "GCD Timeline" {
submission [label=3D<Submission Period<br />up to 7=C2=A0days>]
discussion [label=3D<Discussion Period<br />30=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>]
deliberation[label=3D<Deliberation Period<br />14=C2=A0days>]
withdrawn [label=3DWithdrawn, shape=3Drectangle]
accepted [label=3DAccepted, shape=3Drectangle]
=20=20=20=20
submission -> discussion
submission -> withdrawn
discussion -> deliberation
deliberation -> withdrawn
deliberation -> accepted
=20=20=20=20
withdrawn -> submission [label=3D"New version"]
=20=20=20=20
discussion -> withdrawn
}
```
The subsections below detail the various stages and their duration.
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
Anyone can author and submit an GCD as a regular patch and look for
sponsor (see below). The GCD is *submitted* once one or more people
publicly reply =E2=80=9CI sponsor=E2=80=9D and volunteers to be sponsors; t=
he next
step is the *discussion period*.
Author(s) may withdraw their GCD at any time; they can resubmit it again
later, possibly under a new GCD number.
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
Once submitted, the GCD is publicly discussed; authors are encouraged to
publish updated versions incorporating feedback during the discussion.
Once the discussion settles, at the latest after 60 days, the author(s)
publish a final version, leading to the *deliberation period*.
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
All members of any team of the Guix project can participate in
deliberation and are encouraged to do so.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the GCD:
- =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementati=
on of the
proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementati=
on of the
proposal. A team member sending this reply must have actively
cooperated with for discussing the RFC during the discussion period.
See =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D.
The GCD is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
reply, and (2) no one disapproves. In other cases, the GCD is
*withdrawn*.
Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
below.
Anyone who is a team member is a deliberating member and is asked
to contribute to the deliberation. Team members are defined by the
file etc/teams.scm (see =E2=80=9CTeams=E2=80=9D in the manual).
GCD acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
the participants consent to its implementation.
Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it
could mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in
the GCD are accepted by the community.
## Decision Making
Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions
that everyone can live with.
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
details, you are encouraged to read
<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
## Merging Final GCDs
Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a committer merges the final GCD
following these steps:
1. filling in the remaining metadata in the GCD headers (changing the
`status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
previously-accepted GCDs are deprecated by this new GCD, change the
`status` header accordingly);
2. committing everything;
3. announcing the publication of the GCD.
All the GCDs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike
4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
[GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html).
## GCD Template
The expected structure of GCDs is captured by the template in the file
`000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown syntax.
## Cost of Reverting
The GCD process described in this documented can be amended by
subsequent GCDs.
## Drawbacks
There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more t=
han
it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help
contribution, not an end in itself.
Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices
and notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon,
and solicit opinions of those who remained silent.
## Open Issues
There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
While we want to ensure that technical changes that affect users are
well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become undu=
ly
burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to
maintain moving forward.
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 23:56:46 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 18:56:46 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55409 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tW2OM-0006CS-22 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:56:46 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::334]:53561) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tW2OK-0006Bq-Cb for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:56:44 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4361f796586so16172625e9.3 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736466998; x=1737071798; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+5B4J4IMxBvnWxPCWjXWYWCLzwJJU7n+vKcxXW7YIeY=; b=BJHWLHg3QTmd6Hyi72KW5GjndjXg568TkSw08uDDId6yy7DkJLReYDJzsfrn9leaFk igqnYQhjUrHDLZfHY3h/HWgpq4SpbWXYOuTJ+ntGr1IQzH8oXAeH3pgRFmx6tBq/dfrp eAy78xY0o3fZAG7CFp6dk40lyXlw3YsKcIGBOyAh9J6B2yaozL4GKYC241+9dEZyAA7N JzXzdoSOneU4ozyJp8Y9Lt+1nRvUxqCWyDC4+z8WdiA4qrrJMcxl2eZeWIyLa7BERVWA aT0HD7pHMSfMeCwOMOmh95/MVg7PqZhoyjRvTI67b+v5BZFZp2xlZdHRdLNeE3L71cX0 WoGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736466998; x=1737071798; 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=+5B4J4IMxBvnWxPCWjXWYWCLzwJJU7n+vKcxXW7YIeY=; b=QQPJSH49SGQzGk8NrBBB73zcC2Np82tDvfu3bPxBrRFo3pk8EYQdK4CJUWcTx1QywW gZL9sfoH4jOcQZ19iP2EmkiVFaDjo9WnuP3jCcsMlG8WJTIraVfw6rQAy5mu7Qxsx2j1 aoAyjvoULKZ9Z1a9qYMJ8nfPMFTi1CUqfplDe2KqF8D60sqVIg0OeirxZAbprhQnRnyM RCmd0vQMl2aKZz8A87onU6Q5M/PitE8Vj5Daw2MUmo4RU5Ac8aGenZ+KpLm3oh8SUJts ZIS4YOv6Qln1hw1XRrisWeQtqkB2ft88ZLNiXER3jAQ+iP+/GIq8gBFZaCThRYU3gjFK mLKg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXF0fSO42baD7DyH8gd7Qt00RFYoZGwfn7l0k3+p56gyiikbSGqt/nROQT2je9bB/XyteMmlA==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwCMudUy/7d1EkTyozHbyQiOtDiKYQr68qzQxkBxCkh4Mky0G7i BWddTtEuGfRJ+bGlFWTxZRCjDt5BwzS9hWC2KVKPIX1vU+dMUQ6VR7vHfQ== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncubiYjnIQP9DgGDUD40C2VD33w1ot/Qgx2s0Trm4MnXEAHcGPF7P/BHiotee+s z+P5XmrKy+nbD5dTbiN7WClzIo6uTWg/gY0C3mRv4fFAS1wqHhuwkl0qg+AKZt7BlqS4j9rLCUV mQ+K/D8vt4za4TpkqlRAi8yH4zRGh08oAoEaqXwMQsUXGxBlkSGEorYaAfmLtYhRNJg36BofTej 1ERsaGAt1hnuLd8iHeDgh6EztuOOjw23uyV4O1QlWn4HFPd9B//K2Q= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHQ8l8c6YIsNt/Fq+a7EyIGBT3jhORGE9JJo8kqma5J/znpQQ5UrybgrLuFnVtulIRqKczpCQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1c1a:b0:434:a802:e9a6 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e2679a94mr82252975e9.7.1736466997984; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:f526:4f2e:d573:8d5c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-38a8e38c1d6sm3042499f8f.50.2025.01.09.15.56.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:37 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: reza <reza@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, ludo@HIDDEN Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process. In-Reply-To: <01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <825F8319-4F41-4F4C-81B3-2C84A73A13CF@HIDDEN> <01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 00:22:05 +0100 Message-ID: <87y0zjh8te.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@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 Jan 2025 at 06:33, reza via Guix-patches via <guix-patches@HIDDEN> wrote: > As a maybe tangential comment: There is no mention of an identifier > for an RFC (e.g. PEP number) or a unique string to identify or > reference it? I think there is one: the first one is 001 and then they will be incremented. For instance, assuming v6, it would be: RFC 001, or RFC 001-rfc-process. Is it clearer? Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 23:56:46 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 18:56:46 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55407 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tW2OL-0006CQ-OW for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:56:46 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x332.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::332]:50356) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tW2OI-0006Bm-Kt for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:56:43 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x332.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-43690d4605dso11541885e9.0 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736466996; x=1737071796; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Je8EaiPc43LBYsVKDoV4vIXrw+B4pWjFnGKsiL3Etxo=; b=L78OWNpMo1I2EJRkJuoWaOZtAftMEtIsYq2xmJVunG9ApHwbjBi6LN9bKphRQU/DqS 2agIKTki3YnAucPONa4u92EO1ZK/VI2oCGqIuvzbPPoYJgecociKNIdkQj/vuJ+48bYA RUk/0BZCqngC47JDluqak9X3vwRh9Wm3144aePcvGxkmOEjF7JahqyYsfJ+UJXL67jNd QIIPcAvA3DzV7cXDCk1WWBEAfiKkQ3Wug0YDO5x6qR+GeBOjZT3La/CkdP4xD1n5pS40 nUIANtEsp1O1JYMaG0in/oXkYV7E3F0UfKHLU+FembuqfRUf8ODTNO+/GL0hgPySICrJ DpWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736466996; x=1737071796; 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=Je8EaiPc43LBYsVKDoV4vIXrw+B4pWjFnGKsiL3Etxo=; b=tU7NFO2iz6btbNaxP5NkiZIme30vgkQ3uJxOuH5hsvT5yctug7teoORPU/ye5PMw3k ayLkCsg5hBmax7DHYYfAEeNI19HT7nvVOAaiCf0IgRjaBHNcnr85PIZ8XfPx15K4S71Q FNB4TbNsIPzl1S/UwEE7RpTqSftoDCNYlEGG11BBU0ZfGNviYsjhC4dQ18GcKkF530f0 viM6WvFrMAFemk1OkM45Sn7hDmnJqNGgSJhr9szFAkAs+yyPgVGs189FCtk79i52Jp7M YOXu5bxaAau7iHbKybmnu99dVew11a5xWKO6Y225h71rfQ7AfXhOom0gT7LYDeBsO95x gd+g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzHDA+b4qT5liUHUhnG09P0vvNs7S/n6Y7rTJQ+8TZXDBHYFzME Bzfsk6VQUB46aV7DHJ0Jj9ldKhQH65QAiAHpfmsJVS3P4ql3MQhs9BJkIw== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvPPKhnnfUgxaP3fMVWNvoHkV2dmXSIJzxNw4MUXExmFcB6z5oDr4Ub2v4OrdH SDixr4ODKc186gOIRR+sdwVuSt4gk1dPF8ACy6Vp/wmRuLmD6U2WGZ6wRF9vFnWOckbkcmj9a5h 6/Flil0SjEJ45x+JqcBykxV80hhsA0Z8m510g4P0RXQihcgvS+0GoGCKFxCLVVZRlQJl+SPQQ3W f0Bed/JU7OzXcCJI1QrxyrZuz5wKGVe8mdCkbg5XtRFd4yaa7msbkU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEi4sNIW393BkdbUb2cTT5mzTzKybtiJA2Xz8YoNK/FpqSR7wHj0Y4MoarbOTMZvzm6fqECSw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1d96:b0:434:f219:6b28 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e26d9477mr69120395e9.24.1736466996007; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:f526:4f2e:d573:8d5c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e9e37d46sm34583175e9.25.2025.01.09.15.56.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:56:35 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <8734hsqfqz.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c75vao7.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734hsqfqz.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 23:48:45 +0100 Message-ID: <8734hrioxe.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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 Thu, 09 Jan 2025 at 14:27, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote: > Repository created! > > https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix/requests-for-comments.git/ I like the idea of =E2=80=99Guix Common Document=E2=80=99 (GCD) instead of Request-For-Comment (RFC). Do you think it would be possible to rename this repository before it we start to effectively it? Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 22:33:12 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 17:33:12 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55192 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tW15T-0001yJ-K9 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:33:11 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:32902) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tW15R-0001xz-GK for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:33:09 -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 1tW15K-0005NB-Dd; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:33:03 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=CT3OkXkZJEAl9eo24t6GBy57lQISiDfEprIF4SJ5Iz8=; b=PZ15+4KSrYRgu4B2zxbg YrNKKbu2VYE4QhDSNeZz4TG21p4c6to4Fsa68Yol86V55yn0FHxd4z2ypdPxz9d1TwU1CFOwgE2gG MfBm8qIWX4MEkd/pr7t90W1wPEezpF8+zGPIt8ugdpEMwYoBV+JSCJ3J8AesPUvDL8jR3yVJbz+pA PY8pxN6qaf7ptzw5nz2KUkRcffpXSX7W8dotegwmCiMVOfFXYBJh5CTBWn6Qr1ASRioMMkqtLYaGG 7Rll0p+5wCIH562qYd99/TmhkjIqTmBx9ApGTQ8ezx2k5GAFTuS0CQ3CMvIM0WOwNG4S94q4DJ6/O Gxfc33ipwtDaGw==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87seps3qm8.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:21:19 +0100") References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87seps3qm8.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 23:32:59 +0100 Message-ID: <871pxbobxg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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, (Stripping comments/suggestions I agree with.) Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> skribis: >> supporters: ? >> submitted: 2024-12-12 > > I think the choice of this date is unclear. Do you consider that your > reply or mine implies being Supporter? > > Well, since this document bootstrap the process it=E2=80=99s difficult. := -) > Especially when the first draft had been sent on 2023-10-31. Yeah, it=E2=80=99s quite arbitrary here, I=E2=80=99m fine with any date. Obviously it=E2=80=99ll be more important once the process is actually in p= lace. >> ## Supporters >> >> A supporter is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project=E2= =80=99s >> practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a team >> member. Supporters do not have to agree with all the points of the RFC >> but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions are a good >> thing for the community. >> >> Supporters help the author(s) by participating in discussions, amending >> the document as it is being discussed, and acting as timekeepers. > > I would add (picked from v5): > > Please make sure that all have the time and space for expressing > their comments. The RFC is about significant changes, thus more > opinions is better than less. You mean that this (soliciting opinions) is something supporters/sponsors should do, right? I agree. >> ```dot <- TODO: make this a separate file > > I would prefer to let the dot file here as-is. Because it=E2=80=99s easi= er to > read in full terminal mode. In addition, yes maybe we could display the > graph as an image file. Yeah, I=E2=80=99m split between Dot and ASCII art=E2=80=A6 > As said above, I would clarify: > > The RFC is *submitted* once one or more > people publicly reply =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D and volunteers = to be > supporters; the next step is the *discussion period*. OK. >> All members of any team of the Guix project can participate in >> deliberation and are encouraged to do so. > > I would restore the past suggestion to mention the file =E2=80=99teams.sc= m=E2=80=99; see > suggestion below (mark **). Agreed. I=E2=80=99ll send v7 tomorrow. Thank you! Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 21:17:13 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 16:17:13 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54694 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tVztx-0005tA-1F for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 16:17:13 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56040) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tVztt-0005sn-Vr for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 16:17:11 -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 1tVztn-0003ID-VC; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 16:17:04 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=HGmMD+sFnj6Wc9FO1H4iaNz78Y/voJccrWWrGvZK2YE=; b=lZgpBvNsSC+IoBIJ82/j BG+9iHWbXGbFbidleJaC+SCz6LjmVIF6wK+5UVKmukDKzsJNC9UmWS2pXQuwkB+x90G69yow0/QMQ K4QCfPhutHNUrxfeksXTzw/GcVZwefDdpSW/Ci7Gu8PCdLd4YuB5gjmWJo0CeFevki+Bme8h8AbVz tnR0VQk806QPgGCpzJhwI7rV7I/h0JrWKQQ2pss3SmP49eIXazHFUfOga+1MmU36R9vvF/yJ1Y2qG kX61EXN1Zsjhwfex+xHY4JEvswPe6GEn1brBFi21nxanYtiI/T+kvOP9KSpJJwMYCwjCo7TDk1/S3 LOsdoYoP+RjcAg==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: "pukkamustard" <pukkamustard@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <D6WTZC39AXKQ.2IP46QCJF7Z1G@HIDDEN> (pukkamustard@HIDDEN's message of "Wed, 08 Jan 2025 16:26:40 +0000") References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <D6WTZC39AXKQ.2IP46QCJF7Z1G@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 22:16:50 +0100 Message-ID: <87frlrofgd.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 pukkamustard, Thanks for insightful comments! "pukkamustard" <pukkamustard@HIDDEN> skribis: > - I had to think if I am a _team member_ or not. The term is not defined = in the > document. I think this is mostly due to there not being a RFC on teams = (yet). > Still, to make the Process RFC understandable, I'd add a brief explanat= ion of > what team members are (i.e. members in etc/teams.scm).=20 A mistake of mine in v6; we should reintroduce a mention of =E2=80=98etc/teams.scm=E2=80=99 or a reference to the manual. > Likewise, I think the Process RFC would be simpler to understand if fee= dback > is required from a fixed number of team members instead of a percentage. Wouldn=E2=80=99t a fixed number of people run the risk of letting a few peo= ple move forward despite general apathy? (Given that that fixed number might represent 25% of team members today, and 5% a few years from now.) > - The term "supporter" is used for two things where it's not clear if > it's the same: > > 1. People listed as supporters in the RFC metadata. > 2. Team members that respond with "I support" during the Deliberation > Period. Yeah, =E2=80=9Csponsors=E2=80=9D may work better for (1). > Furthermore, in the section "Submission Period" it says that authors > can look for supporters. But the wording in the "Deliberation Period" > suggests that the "I support" emails should only be sent in the > Deliberation Period when the final version is published. We could state that anything that comes before or after the Deliberation Period is ignored, to avoid the ambiguity. > I'd suggest renaming the RFC state "Final" to "Accepted". Agreed (that was an omission). > - In Section "Deliberation Period" the team member response is "I disappr= ove" > but in the next section the term "disagree" is used. I'd use the same t= erm for > clarity. Oops, agreed. > - The "I disapprove" reply is only allowed if member actively proposed > alternative solutions during the "Discussion Period". I feel that might= be a > bit of a strong requirement as that means you can not disapprove a RFC = if you > only see it after the "Deliberation Period" has started. Maybe that's o= k as > RFCs need to be announced to guix-devel. Still it might be a bit strong= . Maybe > something along the lines: "A team member sending this reply must expla= in > their disapproval and should suggest constructive changes to the propos= al that > would make it approvable." Hmm yeah, I see what you mean; it shouldn=E2=80=99t be understood as =E2=80= =9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D is strictly forbidden for people who have not made counter-proposals during the discussion. Yet, I agree with Simon that =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D should be discouraged in this case. Probabl= y we can fine tune the words. > - I think the name "Guix Consensus Documents (GCD)" would be slightly > funnier - a play on greatest common divisor (as mentioned by Simon). > But I think RFC is a term that is more widely understood and that's > fine. Heheh. I=E2=80=99m fine either way but I=E2=80=99m already getting used to =E2=80= =9CRFC=E2=80=9D. :-) > I will be afk during the Deliberation Period (and not present in > Brussels) but I think this is an important step for Guix and am fine > with being added to the `supporters` field. Thanks. Too bad we won=E2=80=99t meet in Brussels though. Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 21:00:52 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 16:00:51 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54554 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tVze7-00054h-Jz for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 16:00:51 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49220) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tVze6-00054V-1g for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 16:00:50 -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 1tVze0-0000fA-KU; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 16:00:44 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=3VjkXW0pJwvy3bUKjGg4sECX2eNqt9+vzw6XFzJdLdY=; b=WFvPGuE4jPX9yi0Kr26a rabIEpFUz5aPv3L4wFJGfY3e3Xdju92UHcU5brISsUhJIQLb7HgQogz3O8WGqTnQ424P7gMegM5AB QUYF0M/l7wNTtmwBMQxzgbDqmwmzrYG1nbe4maj1Sy/7wbP1VeGUW563AnYec/GKDDpjJiRZFYDgZ NiaahGOiFMMyKfxqZuK+418wrrzkMAZEt014R8lHPNgKUJjz9LNkAMIxXUdzZYp3iYeLIJVhcYPjK JP/WK0rBTQe5r+NlKlP2riAADGb/JDOhjZvlUyZNyIx0v9K6HVbmPjv0PPKItFF16FAEafG0AJJ2Y uiAl9xQvYQKzXA==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87o70f52j3.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:18:40 +0100") References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <D6WTZC39AXKQ.2IP46QCJF7Z1G@HIDDEN> <87o70f52j3.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 22:00:34 +0100 Message-ID: <87wmf3og7h.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 (---) Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> skribis: > Ah. Hum. The idea of the process is: > > + author sends > (*) + one or more people reply =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D > + it becomes a submitted RFC > + all the dance=E2=80=A6 > + Deliberation Period: > (**) . I support > . I approve > . I disapprove > > Ah indeed (*) and (**) are not the same: > > 1. =E2=80=9CSupporter=E2=80=9D means (*) > 2. Team members replying =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D means (**) > > Thanks. Maybe (1)(*) should be renamed. How about =E2=80=9Csponsors=E2=80=9D? (I believe I=E2=80=99ve seen it in o= ther similar documents.) Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 17:33:41 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 12:33:41 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54120 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVwPc-0003ws-L5
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 12:33:41 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]:59887)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tVwPR-0003w5-CN
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 12:33:33 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-436281c8a38so9444895e9.3
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 09:33:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736444003; x=1737048803; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=qsb/L5EmZrpxFD5pKlOM46dvUnOeEm2rNwwvD7FV+o8=;
b=m6l3osdhOJ8Sg7A7ECHwUfP2mpP0XKBHgfprCqxO2qQrl6O5omuSC7i80FN1417tS+
RzW2oiyDTL6PQW3faUZ732DyV7aUrB2gcob2UDnM3Q1femvpeWFWQBbaC6eYGESalovg
4QU2iFSJBo5tFevcLKibvruYig+mdJV8lZrbQ11EdjG5Ex+0nmxtaUfqbn5n1RVMdNGq
RSNVP0pM6l8fkGAHqD8OhFifm9mhojo0WwRany7BnBSDMzp/5zi64ycJvCS3GxY2a+O/
8MIKWC5DluRKAoiIG7hQIUjTQ+95+cYgWwe4RS0p6/LApeyUBy4CBoVMYeNUvVJwbatj
mEww==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736444003; x=1737048803;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject
:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=qsb/L5EmZrpxFD5pKlOM46dvUnOeEm2rNwwvD7FV+o8=;
b=aJ2NFKIbSBwjzp+Sd3F80UPodzqnGaLg6ZqQYv70odfYQBId4rtsgGIzYhf8xpRgip
lOlAufz8uSI9y3Z+G7kcEdfHj7vTsayVjNkW609/wa6TiQ3h5gPmm4TmudT8hmA8QQJ0
HPSDbCV2eLDB9gAXZSK/9EppHatPKtyVHlnYMV4H/k2vm2gsm/8oSM+yHIsUlcTQy2+9
Q/wGcuB8tWsNb6MjioO4oNwvziSFVtQIjHmTP04rtRzeyjfdeYIubgQCoP/f8TjewCXb
kEVwpyhTwYpMNcXQSBaZ+mI1v4FpnhaJ1AW8nFvjnehv7al0PSr0+xmoCuhL/rCpSS1i
m8OA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCXDJvZAZTmJONU/CRsNFEbJXEp9P/pSQfHCH4k9+oaT6aiIEPZ+XbXuZfijSgyu/SxAXVHUSg==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyR+PEQ3xS3jivd2o4L2hczL0jq48OcGiwuFA0yT72W/seuHOHC
8eW4pHLVB1YbifTqk20RI9e4GHQX828sJqUsXSIUBmX4xHlVQPJexGpvyQ==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctdFWHBYlmr+glmPykHuzFR5F5fKyUkt6CJqlcsAmYbV/Mic4xxAF/tjz3/MRJ
KigZfjl8utP3USEkvunmXDvbzJfFioeZGL1J0Jgfi3Dq9NuYlesKB7Eb+YCGHS852Z/glI7Dt9l
R/rjD6c3IywVwct1fEIXkPKRHQpqxdKwrIc+U5B47FYkAGtANUf1gHXXUE0EHXvWfflsDuA1IpU
tjZin96pbjttn1RkyJ+F1DvWE42htDo0SPyvAX24YOATjjyFQ/fjmX+lrlAhOdjyTmyQYrgKV0Q
NJf9vJGJxIPPaJHx1OYups5LNhwZvZhCvc8hIg+RKA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGxpviZD2UUACiQceKc5gtVBbgDsju3D6LBvg97oj1gaFjffNidXXqglcCHWtLjFde80EnFXA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3516:b0:436:5165:f206 with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-436e27075eemr79246795e9.31.1736444003017;
Thu, 09 Jan 2025 09:33:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-45.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr.
[194.254.61.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-436e2ddcda3sm61576125e9.22.2025.01.09.09.33.22
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 09 Jan 2025 09:33:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: pukkamustard <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <D6WTZC39AXKQ.2IP46QCJF7Z1G@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<D6WTZC39AXKQ.2IP46QCJF7Z1G@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:18:40 +0100
Message-ID: <87o70f52j3.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: 74736
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 Jan 2025 at 16:26, "pukkamustard" <pukkamustard@HIDDEN> wrot=
e:
> - I had to think if I am a _team member_ or not. The term is not defined =
in the
> document. I think this is mostly due to there not being a RFC on teams =
(yet).
> Still, to make the Process RFC understandable, I'd add a brief explanat=
ion of
> what team members are (i.e. members in etc/teams.scm).=20
Yes, that=E2=80=99s the idea. Ludo pointed that teams.scm file and it was =
in v5
but not in v6. Maybe something lost in translation. :-)
> Likewise, I think the Process RFC would be simpler to understand if fee=
dback
> is required from a fixed number of team members instead of a percentage=
. I
> believe there has been some discussion on this, that I have not been ab=
le to
> follow completely, so ignore if already discussed and agreed upon.
What do you suggest?
Well, FWIW, some explanations, maybe it could help to find a better way.
It appears to me easier to know if the quorum is reached or not, I
guess.
./etc/teams.scm list-teams | recsel -CP members | sort | uniq | wc -l
I think that the input of some team members might happen on the
Discussion Period and not specifically on the Deliberation Period.
Well, then you would tell me: I cannot have an opinion on any topic. :-)
Or I do not have the bandwidth to follow all the discussion. Maybe.
But then, if we are not able to express an opinion on such topic, does
we consent?
From my point of view, the idea is to be sure we =E2=80=93 as a community =
=E2=80=93
consent about significant changes.
And if I =E2=80=93 as a deliberating member =E2=80=93 do not feel confident=
enough, I
have two options: (a) Disapprove, for instance because I estimate we
have not discussed enough the topic at hand and the topic deserves more
discussion or another counter proposal or (b) Silent (no reply),
although it would mean to me something is wrong.
On this, the danger is the =E2=80=9Csocial pressure=E2=80=9D because the De=
liberation
Period is public. But if it=E2=80=99s a real issue, improvement on that co=
uld
be part of an amendment for the next version. :-)
Please keep in mind (1) the =E2=80=9Csocial pressure=E2=80=9D would mean it=
=E2=80=99s not a safe
place hence it would raise more than the potential RFC and (2) consent
does not mean being 100% in agreement with all the details but it means
=E2=80=9Cit=E2=80=99s a good direction, not perfect but I can live with the
imperfections=E2=80=9D. Somehow. :-)
> - The term "supporter" is used for two things where it's not clear if
> it's the same:
>
> 1. People listed as supporters in the RFC metadata.
> 2. Team members that respond with "I support" during the Deliberation
> Period.
Ah. Hum. The idea of the process is:
+ author sends
(*) + one or more people reply =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D
+ it becomes a submitted RFC
+ all the dance=E2=80=A6
+ Deliberation Period:
(**) . I support
. I approve
. I disapprove
Ah indeed (*) and (**) are not the same:
1. =E2=80=9CSupporter=E2=80=9D means (*)
2. Team members replying =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D means (**)
Thanks. Maybe (1)(*) should be renamed.
> I'd suggest renaming the RFC state "Final" to "Accepted".
I agree.
> - In Section "Deliberation Period" the team member response is "I disappr=
ove"
> but in the next section the term "disagree" is used. I'd use the same t=
erm for
> clarity.
I agree.
> - The "I disapprove" reply is only allowed if member actively proposed
> alternative solutions during the "Discussion Period". I feel that might=
be a
> bit of a strong requirement as that means you can not disapprove a RFC =
if you
> only see it after the "Deliberation Period" has started. Maybe that's o=
k as
> RFCs need to be announced to guix-devel. Still it might be a bit strong=
. Maybe
> something along the lines: "A team member sending this reply must expla=
in
> their disapproval and should suggest constructive changes to the propos=
al that
> would make it approvable."
If you do not see the RFC after the long Discussion Period of 60 days,
then why do you see it in the short Deliberation Period? ;-)
Somehow, we need to bound, else it becomes hard to move forward, IMHO.
Well, I assume good faith, I would like to counter the behaviour: I
sleep during all the discussion where people took the time to polish and
end up with something all agree, and me, I awake up in the last minute
and bang! That=E2=80=99s unfair, IMHO.
It=E2=80=99s not explicitly mentioned (maybe it should be): I think that any
=E2=80=9Csubmitted=E2=80=9D RFC must be advertised via info-guix@HIDDEN
> - I think the name "Guix Consensus Documents (GCD)" would be slightly
> funnier - a play on greatest common divisor (as mentioned by Simon).
> But I think RFC is a term that is more widely understood and that's
> fine.
I agree. I remember your suggestion at the last Guix Days. And I lost
it among other stuff during the year 2024=E2=80=A6 Arf!
> I'm not quite clear what this means, but: I support. :)=20
>
> I will be afk during the Deliberation Period (and not present in
> Brussels) but I think this is an important step for Guix and am fine
> with being added to the `supporters` field.
Thank you.
Ah what a pity to not see you in Brussels!
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 17:33:40 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 12:33:40 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54118 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tVwPa-0003wp-9h for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 12:33:40 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x433.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::433]:50652) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tVwPS-0003w9-GB for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 12:33:30 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-x433.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-386329da1d9so694083f8f.1 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 09:33:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736444004; x=1737048804; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=L2cqZVcleLyLkhUgb9Q2h6lMLcipv4mD1SEOkbdIWtE=; b=aa4A7AQXuYY1QlX3vAfzaC63Vo8wg4kZ79AwO29UmxrG97/XY9UGJsAv4uHqgMAxu5 Wi1X4C8VTGL2BhzPwfunU25J5l3bsTthjlL/VhX2yQW9qu9WN6Ap/A6pUHQVrny0nMlr Y64WTJJh5QJmkhF1afy1YvCmQXd5s7VhF20LL48cGOn6d9QQaNAaxH9bYeZcotKN+qlB 3cPu7Bluvwd8XgNRvaVJnfw+e9nGARHCRHvc6B0qhpHhSdD/Z+WG4mgeSXjltBTioBRa 6x3gtuA9ZR5HCAuJ6laN6sm55VlWc6JXJeDKIspy9y35O1PVKSInbz5H3djQGIT5lSVI UnRQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736444004; x=1737048804; 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=L2cqZVcleLyLkhUgb9Q2h6lMLcipv4mD1SEOkbdIWtE=; b=TjQPNN/wa5QBKC7SvJ+YJW0L6FVdMQt511CzU1Jf3JsSzNCZLtfITlxPinIwqsROa2 y8nxNwp8kfNnpuvDIWLTwiE/B6Qv+A8Yhii7RvdKVXS3cZcpI4DuvLVW6+ew5/pSzdRR DSQ9TeBtnhAvu92lKFBOXJ6m+zk4xyeCejFx1gW60QbqT2tHLZnj+45/59oGya+JXMzw aZu5pBZMRwwzMK51lE+xHygfOcoj2A0tzvEJeHoRsrbSKJObSRWwsKL32W51p06a5BqR +3kqd3m49IgLQpZaLXmL2hlP8NocaRIAUbEa3REGaCiAgPrSlhNP2fHJpSMjVpzHvTOn TZzA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVnc5x9GmtrZ018nF9JWkH1Ae9btS5Ima+0ngx8Ryhc60JLzD5NRNxTwNk2zhLyl7lY9Qj9Hw==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzIWQpIDlhp+Chx7/8nQfPJDp0p8nB2qWRIE6/mXLmWa+rTpgcj PQqxwR9l0BwEl7rEVSll4lm78lrN07cqStV5mTXt03S9eVXAbUtIRF5KiA== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvAjmbwaOe9gSyFxqwzw5CcythRe1SyiXmSVmCHt1PZ+UP26xb7Ep7wTcLWsyJ olqUE8Dx6wObDPegvWJLJMo7+5+G4XPxLrEo/4k3fivh1T9Kyw57uClXha/vhTLGvyIGa2mXkf1 pOR/JAMkcg7nGC6nOtxWYZpxYR+94lBhy7LLuvEK3JmC4Y6Q/bb4srnVDfotrVmHH67HPQK1uy7 TpOybFPt+OCSshrSSTAEKSyA0r0hQzyFU5zNLRuJNm/uzRwZXq58PGBzJMv3TY4SKUVeHEs8OMs R5FBcDaWRA3CPUA51IOSM7JLc7/kIn2K5PwYCCZV1A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGxWLBC6ulMM0BoQ8l79vbdC4G7l45kKpNPIgsVc42WTJkT6pXwUSimf2wmKlqsDIqGB3GUvg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6482:0:b0:385:f195:26f with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38a872daa31mr6067084f8f.19.1736444004188; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 09:33:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-44.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr. [194.254.61.44]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-436dcc8ddddsm60884945e9.0.2025.01.09.09.33.23 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 09 Jan 2025 09:33:23 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <874j29uyol.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87h66aime2.fsf@HIDDEN> <874j29uyol.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:21:54 +0100 Message-ID: <87jzb352dp.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 Jan 2025 at 10:12, Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN> wrote: > I'd like to be a supporter. I suppose the authors get to determine > whether I am "sufficiently familiar", or is it based on self-reporting? > Perhaps this point should be clarified. Thanks for your comment. Indeed, let clarify it for the next version. >>> submitted: 2024-12-12 >>> date: 2025-01-15 > > Should other dates such as target discussion period end as well as > target deliberation period end also be noted here? I agree this needs a clarification. Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 17:33:31 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 12:33:31 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54116 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVwPS-0003wN-Sv
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 12:33:31 -0500
Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::434]:56398)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tVwPQ-0003w3-5B
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 12:33:29 -0500
Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-385ef8b64b3so1089614f8f.0
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 09:33:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736444002; x=1737048802; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=9Cf6ALcaOF0jEacKa7uawRYLIZ/zQTFaxdnyHtZG1r4=;
b=We8pYkhnlCMtfuyb/vZFLMm5fCs2UXRlNkpwv3Ak1MPH5CyJ86vY+WHR8QD2EtlFik
HA915I8qej9PFHDDBQwJQ3paniWTAdVSuujLlJy6i1vw2zyBmUVHKEN0MMlN78y79dcS
mwZ7Qf5rnzRpAFX4yPdu3o87iOldBv8Rvdbw1W6zEj9n0+mDebzTGEhoeTSrC2GRKDab
bEy6fm45y9cke6onhpEgw7eiIR7Mca21/scffyQium7MqwL3g3bBWQwvBK2b68/BFA+/
BwPB5TUGXnhfrWP4sw1GCWHnChT0zssTUdHoLPJe9KigwhiWDHtuHmRjJLKBPuthkR8R
YWLA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736444002; x=1737048802;
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=9Cf6ALcaOF0jEacKa7uawRYLIZ/zQTFaxdnyHtZG1r4=;
b=mIZltO7ZGwMldQgZMoCYYA7YO6KhsDwSZyrX+znlWEYZb1kquGnF7Ycbkd8VMswGgA
rj5fXW5kawbTpodpvrarnzWqOtT6FlyWbNTUo3EcyBgwDva30c8ArgB3wWEsWRqgorhw
h45KSNdzq5QFfBPLbriv8KFLkWWW8RzY/aoPstmZ9w0Berpkn80V9STMScCQs1E3HD1r
IzME1Yz7/T9fnCrxhUcfJl5ByHeXILj7FY0ylni8+zJv44EjUsMjAbf98YFW9V8hTxjI
w2SlG6L0Ivr7W8gGURfrGneM0QK6ZJT18yBvMQmUxqPF6zifjjxObixoczGoD27Kvj/2
L3wg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCXT2kLzTVYCSVa22hTUpQ4eleeg9V6MBlzGNazUQORqfBX3aSLTntZMJVFzGmW+SNptjsAs2Q==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxgMwqqHwHvoVy+sTOXkmhiPRmvLLpgIhkbNiN6/zXQdCH7Uf1V
u6hq+szBux3otzSc9DiUu6XFM35oRmoVu+1xInT8EgOZLnTTTT02
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsioSSzY4XNoqm1WH9GHHF0zj5R/O3NQVgz6kedfqcbVfBP2f5OiFGCXkN5igH
hCNBRzQ4NRDl3TTKBnwtah4fCtCA8N6WBue1kLyAGTMciCMefTiGQ67je76TdsxMr/CaJIxC6/B
hRPbXlpyIdUYJXI+gqH4NM1c85mh+NNniwlJkMayhsectV2f7XLstOcNZTwXqCLk9AEdRCf6r1b
dj9//e4iHh4FnUGXkYVDz2mCZc2AuCsl3y6fvxeaJNw+uuCKL1Uej5jl7SYrm84MdOVOU9hWrLk
hM9Pf7VCXI9wKKnbeEX8MWzGlMiZR5dmxu5n6IJrVA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGh3CiSlJzGgheW9cxPHXKUSbzPTz8Q6Ef0PqPrb0AITtQtojwksC/EPCGN/z2RfZBuJW+TqQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2a3:b0:385:efc7:932d with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a8730faafmr6853989f8f.46.1736444001706;
Thu, 09 Jan 2025 09:33:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-40.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr.
[194.254.61.40]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a8e4b82ddsm2336023f8f.71.2025.01.09.09.33.20
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 09 Jan 2025 09:33:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
In-Reply-To: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
<87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:21:19 +0100
Message-ID: <87seps3qm8.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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@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 Mon, 06 Jan 2025 at 23:29, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote:
> title: Requests-for-Comment Process
> id: 000
I think it=E2=80=99s better to start with 001 and have 000 for the template.
> status: submitted
> discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
> authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
> supporters: ?
> submitted: 2024-12-12
I think the choice of this date is unclear. Do you consider that your
reply or mine implies being Supporter?
Well, since this document bootstrap the process it=E2=80=99s difficult. :-)
Especially when the first draft had been sent on 2023-10-31.
I suggest to clarify and to extend:
> The RFC is *submitted* once it has at least one supporter in addi=
tion to
> the author(s).
with:
The RFC is *submitted* once it has at least one supporter in
addition to the author(s). See Submission Period below.
> date: 2025-01-15
> ---
>
> # Summary
[...]
> # Motivation
[...]
> # Detailed Design
>
> ## When to Follow This Process
[...]
> ## How the Process Works
>
> 1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/requests-for-comments.git .
> 2. Copy `0000-template.md` to `00XY-short-name.md` where `short-name`
> is a short descriptive name long and `XY` is the sequence number.
I suggest: `XY` increments the sequence number.
> 3. Write your RFC following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The RFC mu=
st not
> be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
> implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
> deprecate a previously-accepted RFC, it must explicitly say so.
> 4. Submit the RFC as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
> 5. Announce your RFC at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *supporters*:
> one or more people who will support the RFC and participate in
> discussions by your side (see below).
>
> The RFC is *submitted* once it has at least one supporter in addition to
> the author(s).
See above.
>
> ## Supporters
>
> A supporter is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project=E2=80=
=99s
> practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a team
> member. Supporters do not have to agree with all the points of the RFC
> but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions are a good
> thing for the community.
>
> Supporters help the author(s) by participating in discussions, amending
> the document as it is being discussed, and acting as timekeepers.
I would add (picked from v5):
Please make sure that all have the time and space for expressing
their comments. The RFC is about significant changes, thus more
opinions is better than less.
I think that important to have this written somewhere in the document.
And because author is focused on the proposal =E2=80=93 if one took the tim=
e to
write something, it means one has an idea on some topic that one want to
defend :-) =E2=80=93, then it might be difficult to have the right distance.
Hence Supporter(s) are also the helper / facilitator here.
> ## Timeline
>
> The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following recommended
> periods:
>
> 
I would replace the node =E2=80=99comments=E2=80=99 by discussion in order =
to have
something more homogeneous. Nitpicking? ;-)
> ```dot <- TODO: make this a separate file
I would prefer to let the dot file here as-is. Because it=E2=80=99s easier=
to
read in full terminal mode. In addition, yes maybe we could display the
graph as an image file.
> digraph "RFC Timeline" {
> submission[label=3D<Submission Period<br />up to 7=C2=A0days>]
> comments[label=3D<Discussion Period<br />30=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>]
discussion[label=3D<Discussion Period<br />30=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>]
> deliberation[label=3D<Deliberation Period<br />14=C2=A0days>]
> withdrawn[label=3DWithdrawn, shape=3Drectangle]
> final[label=3DFinal, shape=3Drectangle]
>=20=20=20=20=20
> submission -> comments
> submission -> withdrawn
> comments -> deliberation
discussion -> deliberation
> deliberation -> withdrawn
> deliberation -> final
>=20=20=20=20=20
> withdrawn -> submission [label=3D"New version"]
>=20=20=20=20=20
> comments -> withdrawn
> }
> ```
>
> The subsections below detail the various stages and their duration.
>
> ### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
>
> Anyone can author and submit an RFC as a regular patch and look for
> supporters (see below). The RFC is *submitted* once it has one or more
> supporters; the next step is the *discussion period*.
As said above, I would clarify:
The RFC is *submitted* once one or more
people publicly reply =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D and volunteers to=
be
supporters; the next step is the *discussion period*.
> Author(s) may withdraw their RFC at any time; they can resubmit it again
> later, possibly under a new RFC number.
>
> ### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
[...]
> ### Deliberation Period (14 days)
>
> All members of any team of the Guix project can participate in
> deliberation and are encouraged to do so.
I would restore the past suggestion to mention the file =E2=80=99teams.scm=
=E2=80=99; see
suggestion below (mark **).
> Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
> one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the RFC:
>
> - =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal);
---^
) extra
> - =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementa=
tion of the
> proposal. A team member sending this reply must have actively
> proposed alternative solutions during the discussion period.
I do not think the wording of the last sentence is accurate enough:
Because maybe there is no alternative solution or the status quo is the
one, etc.
Instead, I would write:
A team member sending this reply must have actively cooperated
with for discussing the RFC during the discussion period. See
Decision Making.
> The RFC is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
> reply, and (2) no one disagrees. In other cases, the RFC is
> *withdrawn*.
Here, I would replace =E2=80=99disagrees=E2=80=99 with =E2=80=99disapproves=
=E2=80=99. It appears to me
clearer.
> Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Makin=
g=E2=80=9D
> below.
Here (remember mark ** :-)), I would add this sentence.
Anyone who is on a team (see file =E2=80=98teams.scm=E2=80=99) is a=
deliberating
member and is asked to contribute to the deliberation.
> ## Decision Making
[...]
> ## Merging Final RFCs
[...]
>
> ## RFC Template
>
> The expected structure of RFCs is captured by the template in the file
> `0000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown ornaments.
The number of 000 must be in agreement with the top, IMHO.
> ## Cost of Reverting
[...]
> ## Drawbacks
[...]
> ## Open Issues
[...]
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jan 2025 13:27:43 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jan 09 08:27:43 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51047 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVsZb-0007ry-E9
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 08:27:43 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49664)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tVsZZ-0007rj-UM
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 08:27:42 -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 1tVsZT-0007Z6-R8; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 08:27:35 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=2TF4+wQZoTtcuWPlUgdhnBi4ENMFxMsPOjeZF026aB8=; b=ik+uW5UReS+sTtlYBQw1
kZEDQjaPs4j/9xfojsPIxkgDfJKDKbx71rsw8FYQex7dGXr3ec+u5H03C7fiE/3aQg14cSV8KTEDc
+f0iJOWmCyrwIW/m6fCCWjFk7AyAw6G9ijI48vci2z2a4DFtdC/tKbXr7I3O9RZno1+WUNjvh29fx
DkS5qcN77D9t6Kg2sj3J8JZUksFhRn8e5D6xwqAP27Fo95g+8/PruDWHm9zChn55cA9JpFsPGU8gj
rTNP8+vHnz+OJXaUDjIqL/z7TC7pe8WQqvZcizil+p342oOpZUi22x6/UIrI9yH+uDl7oliIcnMBS
jUySyUHV6j8Slw==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <877c75vao7.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=
=?utf-8?Q?=22's?= message of "Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:53:44 +0100")
References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> <877c75vao7.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 14:27:32 +0100
Message-ID: <8734hsqfqz.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (---)
Repository created!
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix/requests-for-comments.git/
Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jan 2025 16:27:00 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 08 11:27:00 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48640 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVYtY-0003LX-Ac
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:27:00 -0500
Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:35711)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <adarsh@HIDDEN>) id 1tVYtU-0003L3-0A
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:26:58 -0500
Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169])
by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD525240027
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 8 Jan 2025 17:26:46 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017;
t=1736353606; bh=pOvxP0usRYuZZWeMc6kpwAZVG9duSPtSUkXMN1a7LhE=;
h=Mime-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Date:
Message-Id:From:Subject:To:From;
b=L+0h2D1fvCzcQGcvIJZUuK+mFTaZnzlEPZmE50rPoQf8JJYa0GsuYkTB8+wtVgpEO
Dudd8CFsmLJgYYUhtHPEHfuGEjX4hCJ21GkGhtx0DXaH0zR2QLm5ujiq5Oqu/wveX2
JPoebyWotcjPT8RqO7YIxBbb/TVmXyelW/9IODfRTsJ2eOFkaWJ4TxG8MAX3ZUegeo
V6yvYEe2gF+qpcfsIyffYQ5wsEa7EzrFvV7qyaV/O3YS4ZBh1rHYEvCv4zibJ+1HRY
6ao64tvBwV3A4rNnJ9dPPS7CpKFIKqjLPb7o7UrWdHtyFaiKJVcEwP0E3chqxFbK7H
Q9fCQP/Waauvw==
Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4YStbV0Bgfz9rxY;
Wed, 8 Jan 2025 17:26:45 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 16:26:40 +0000
Message-Id: <D6WTZC39AXKQ.2IP46QCJF7Z1G@HIDDEN>
From: "pukkamustard" <pukkamustard@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
To: <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
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 (---)
Thank you all for working on this.
Some comments:
- I had to think if I am a _team member_ or not. The term is not defined in=
the
document. I think this is mostly due to there not being a RFC on teams (y=
et).
Still, to make the Process RFC understandable, I'd add a brief explanatio=
n of
what team members are (i.e. members in etc/teams.scm).=20
=20
Likewise, I think the Process RFC would be simpler to understand if feedb=
ack
is required from a fixed number of team members instead of a percentage. =
I
believe there has been some discussion on this, that I have not been able=
to
follow completely, so ignore if already discussed and agreed upon.
- The term "supporter" is used for two things where it's not clear if
it's the same:
1. People listed as supporters in the RFC metadata.
2. Team members that respond with "I support" during the Deliberation
Period.
Furthermore, in the section "Submission Period" it says that authors
can look for supporters. But the wording in the "Deliberation Period"
suggests that the "I support" emails should only be sent in the
Deliberation Period when the final version is published.
=20
For example: Ricardo replied with "I support". What does that mean when t=
he
Deliberation Period has not yet started?
I think what is meant is that supporters can be recruited at any time
and team members responding during the Deliberation Period with "I
support" become supporters and will be added to the list of supporters
in the metadata. This should be clarified.
- The term "final" is overloaded and underused:
1. "Final" is a state of an RFC.
2. In section "Discussion Period" the authors should publish a "final"
version. But this is not a RFC that has state "Final".
3. In section "Deliberation Period" a valid response by team members is "=
I
accept". The RFC is also described as "accepted". The term for the sta=
te
"Final" is not used.
=20
I'd suggest renaming the RFC state "Final" to "Accepted".
=20
- In Section "Deliberation Period" the team member response is "I disapprov=
e"
but in the next section the term "disagree" is used. I'd use the same ter=
m for
clarity.
- The "I disapprove" reply is only allowed if member actively proposed
alternative solutions during the "Discussion Period". I feel that might b=
e a
bit of a strong requirement as that means you can not disapprove a RFC if=
you
only see it after the "Deliberation Period" has started. Maybe that's ok =
as
RFCs need to be announced to guix-devel. Still it might be a bit strong. =
Maybe
something along the lines: "A team member sending this reply must explain
their disapproval and should suggest constructive changes to the proposal=
that
would make it approvable."
- I think the name "Guix Consensus Documents (GCD)" would be slightly
funnier - a play on greatest common divisor (as mentioned by Simon).
But I think RFC is a term that is more widely understood and that's
fine.
=20
I'm not quite clear what this means, but: I support. :)=20
I will be afk during the Deliberation Period (and not present in
Brussels) but I think this is an important step for Guix and am fine
with being added to the `supporters` field.
-pukkamustard
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jan 2025 15:15:32 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 08 10:15:32 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48523 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVXmO-0008Lq-Ck
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 10:15:32 -0500
Received: from mail-qv1-xf42.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::f42]:55557)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>)
id 1tVXmM-0008LV-GS
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 10:15:31 -0500
Received: by mail-qv1-xf42.google.com with SMTP id
6a1803df08f44-6dcdd9a3e54so166234296d6.3
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 07:15:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736349324; x=1736954124; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date
:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=9J1lGcqf7Ia/IL0DMNt0EpxsIE7hf/Od/jeu2sI2ZtA=;
b=HSiqE9U+Jn0dGQVU9x49nU08QPAb47hKkGV1FRIHHs4Tou0y7PPDVlND69XBon0Dfi
90x06GTQuTB2gYK61al0qqwNFkX6p6QioMwS8Joi07cfzy2lPv+IJTDzTn3furjNl4W3
6pNLlDXFoe9qEAZRXyy28jXKCzIVD817roZVIleUTiI3zbtgBaN58YL5AUMu1GXS1S9I
wGyTiQw6ioM/bD0cxQvNyTNW37fRx9IUEDnErUBiia6c9FnrdcY5yp+xyfCKspXX9blZ
ILYRgmGfm+QGFflTQrORRgYv5idx67/LSw0UpY2TetcqG6LnVgbIh8JRoiucsTGw8Nv4
XgNg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736349324; x=1736954124;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent: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=9J1lGcqf7Ia/IL0DMNt0EpxsIE7hf/Od/jeu2sI2ZtA=;
b=o6kbpJbmpVagRoqQUMi8FWWAE8g2TlN0BQSrxQ7VwiqubjJ8GTs75F82I7NfBrZxuw
VE56MuOvc+3z9FLU727VvPNO4krsaT/Kgnim43gbmm+EvkIkD6mmC5C4VzWi5U50rgKo
4K2Sn6PI31Q1cV2Ak+MWIQjIMq3oOz2hvCqSwYndgcwYcXKOlwX79TMIfGaBaQoyQGE6
6TCAJrFiAcjgGcIdvsUYX4KBIUo6muHxLNwL2eOQdHkAwuW2w+55klzMnHE2AwEFNElW
fHpkC08KvSEpYKj8DohsuroBeSCDrb/6BdtHriboMsEEnmrvxdRJ6rEFvrSy3IEkfsoj
XtNg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCUpAyO/U8oNtqilqxkKw+kOjoDJjT8g2oMG7gZOyLAqiCn434O+VFAUn8JuTLBnCPvcngTt7g==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw+g8LXsQcwU7cDr8qnuxomjO9uBevZNSdj6ye2ZaPLC+0k3xdX
B1XDeUv009Qg1AVJlJ6dE+eFu+hEYPBfkieROP2o/Pugzne6STDuFVYmozuu
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvGWEs/4sEDF1R3QIMH/dy//GiQ+3fl8HEwEeuv/+37JDSutfCjM2GZQvc3oVm
QtcSdaesBV6U8l5sIB5abIBw8F29+mAlbCzouepyosiTWbDjMSo6H//9wHmhlErqNsatZVjbG0G
bnKOOK37DjwvZWKqSfO98CXbZWPKzXabju8G97O4eDv35OTTFAcU4JC3RQuZDyA1GcMQYcdJOmo
N9ZvgjQ9KziUcHeqvIOXyw28c40gDl8krEExL6vVF6NAu6PFJ/V
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFodBhKCiMZs82ixRh0SOkn03v4DTSGEJrPle7BEWQRtdvvTiV+G148rCJiU0/doHqTmnAT9A==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:c26:b0:6df:97ba:4f7a with SMTP id
6a1803df08f44-6df9b30145bmr49479036d6.33.1736349323089;
Wed, 08 Jan 2025 07:15:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gnus ([70.26.179.129]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
6a1803df08f44-6dd18136b00sm189127916d6.55.2025.01.08.07.15.22
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 08 Jan 2025 07:15:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: Request-For-Comment process: concrete implementation (v5)
In-Reply-To: <87zfk229h0.fsf@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?=
=?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Tue, 07 Jan 2025 11:40:11 +0100")
References: <87h6m7yrfh.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttafn3p2.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87zfk229h0.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 10:15:11 -0500
Message-ID: <87wmf5tk00.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: GNU Guix maintainers <guix-maintainers@HIDDEN>,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, Efraim Flashner <efraim@HIDDEN>,
Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN>, Guix Devel <guix-devel@HIDDEN>,
74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
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: -0.7 (/)
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes:
> Even better if we can finalize before Guix Days so:
>
> discussion period ending on Jan. 14th
> deliberation period ending on Jan. 28th
>
> How does that sound?
I have commented on the issue. If my request to be a supporter is
accepted, I support the above amendment to the target dates.
--=20
Suhail
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jan 2025 15:13:03 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 08 10:13:03 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48515 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVXjy-0008B2-Jx
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 10:13:03 -0500
Received: from mail-qk1-x741.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::741]:53736)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>)
id 1tVXjw-0008AV-Fc
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 10:13:01 -0500
Received: by mail-qk1-x741.google.com with SMTP id
af79cd13be357-7b6e9db19c8so1272719485a.3
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 07:13:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736349175; x=1736953975; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date
:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=WkL72YS4lUxQYPMgcCwaBhLaxFBLPzACLOgcDobmy44=;
b=c3l5PdALJ2TA/co4v0Hkha6l8P296x+4RL4Ac9ajX88g1HLJzi7H6kwQqrvqH2oT54
RIryoUaMwHAfS6+gDnUIDFZ5ORN3v3LV+gpp9Sa+P0LxUWqkQ5VU5+Ar5vgOhXUiSI9L
A41aa93J/kddKkAB81SQ+EZ4+xRvAvu1EewpqWbQh4/pgsscKHxdbkclFbgA8YehF9lV
Gkp6gWND9dSHebW+gc8BOik5HnRP+4JxYJ5Q0DgPLiN3XwnWjy3up+JCguvoYa9EuN03
uK/FqCGKUtfTPlOX9xJdATcG6L5In7yXdnBgtV2tGKDMgrwLyG8H8y3ZRgVlvb3WscAI
h+LA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736349175; x=1736953975;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent: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=WkL72YS4lUxQYPMgcCwaBhLaxFBLPzACLOgcDobmy44=;
b=feUzLZhHB+mNAbLOepSd78jeDvVNO4ILQcaiwzHP3rKUpppgMI0WDZqGOB1aF5Eiqn
MdJXqLkNy5U6TFh9diXIB0/wySleEFH723jjDvOSWD3KEmg2NccrPcNJ3JTL1WIqDa5H
LeiMox9F+ySuLrlSV80eFCHBi4pfBz8ojBP7pIue9YEIn7RtadubfUxK4+V/b77XTFui
cuu4fGGPI67ZuUyRADxK7i1tR5xwaz90zUxfHZWqdcF4Jj3o9410omVF1mU/NOiAanik
wP3PkScXstWUtu3wiDHmEmGSr+gNmh8iczmTG/Ei9sqglQ2VqDU+HECslGgG+4a4X4MB
24Lw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCXIsBwXgKbeT/5sT/SDZRpGMLPk+JRNOYckfDioNoeu6+r8J/2d68zBb0vtCkZ3apWwQSXHHA==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywk4mHg5P41Fqj6MTwlWiS3ETUxJBvzQsWuBSrdo5yD/n5+uCrq
0y409TQ7q7ryW/Pg5g4fr+CFbLcAKNI6lzLEXtfxZiuGeiLjRpqR
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncu5bznVROan5GStrnH0QDFA/XriSDmC2pYkE4QUL2D3soac5/HsupuHZfof5N4
dlbs8Sf7yzlyLPMpXh8+ErxqhhWlfxP8dnZt7nQKfl3JPZmUxIpQHqHfZoQfdG02Lj4zOfsaj+H
5gkEq/641kFlPk823pFwbBmoHFvjasJxAvq4ibul8geoSyHsk4uVxBefB0b2u3PgY5UE3UFi6wB
5gqV/6uu3cC2+W3UX4xCgGdqZPSVNC+tA6ASr7SbWBPM9d0XPmd
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGtb3b1mr/tL8afbOOMwe7/eVDccrISQG6TPFHviwqdhK71LXlwWcDpdnWtp1zntujb3C3rYw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4407:b0:7b7:5d6:37fa with SMTP id
af79cd13be357-7bcd9761ed1mr448362085a.41.1736349174680;
Wed, 08 Jan 2025 07:12:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gnus ([70.26.179.129]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
af79cd13be357-7b9ac478d91sm1684127985a.92.2025.01.08.07.12.53
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 08 Jan 2025 07:12:53 -0800 (PST)
From: Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@HIDDEN>
To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87h66aime2.fsf@HIDDEN> (=?utf-8?Q?=22No=C3=A9?=
Lopez"'s message of "Tue, 07 Jan 2025 18:06:45 +0100")
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
<87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87h66aime2.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 10:12:42 -0500
Message-ID: <874j29uyol.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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: -0.7 (/)
No=C3=A9 Lopez <noe@no=C3=A9.eu> writes:
> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes:
> ...
>> id: 000
>
> 001, since the template takes id 0000 for ease of access.
Agreed.
>> supporters: ?
I'd like to be a supporter. I suppose the authors get to determine
whether I am "sufficiently familiar", or is it based on self-reporting?
Perhaps this point should be clarified.
>> submitted: 2024-12-12
>> date: 2025-01-15
Should other dates such as target discussion period end as well as
target deliberation period end also be noted here?
> It=E2=80=99s a good place to add:
> SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
Agreed.
>> A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only =
be reverted at a
>> high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
>> disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
Stating these properties is helpful.
>> ## When to Follow This Process
Perhaps a "vs not" or equivalent could be added to the heading?
>> Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require an RFC; examples include:
I am glad that non-examples were also noted.
>> 1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/requests-for-comments.git=
.
>
> Why the alone dot?
I imagine so as not to be mistaken as being part of the URL. If so, I
would recommend we use < ... > delimiters here and elsewhere. E.g.,
>> 1. Clone <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/requests-for-comments.gi=
t>.
> So we are now three authors and no supporters for this RFC? Could we
> say that more than one author also works for submitting?
I think a clarification on this point is needed. As well, when there
are multiple authors if one or more of them could also act as
supporters.
>> Supporters help the author(s) by participating in discussions, amending
>> the document as it is being discussed, and acting as timekeepers.
The "amending the document" responsibility blurs the distinction between
authors and supporters. Could that be replaced with "providing
constructive comments"? E.g., this message of mine.
>> The RFC is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
>> reply, and (2) no one disagrees. In other cases, the RFC is
>> *withdrawn*.
At that point someone (or some bot) performing cleanup tasks is welcome
to close the issue, if not already closed?
>> https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus .
>
> Another alone dot =F0=9F=A4=94
I propose "<...>." as noted above.
>> All the RFCs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
>> Attribution-ShareAlike
>> 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
>> [GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
>> Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
>> Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html).
>
> I would add =E2=80=9Cor (at your option) any later version.=E2=80=9D
Agreed.
>> The expected structure of RFCs is captured by the template in the file
>> `0000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown ornaments.
>
> Ornament is a complicated word, I would replace it with =E2=80=9Csyntax=
=E2=80=9D.
Agreed.
>> ## Cost of Reverting
>>
>> The RFC process described in this documented can be amended by
^^^^^^^^^^
>> subsequent RFCs.
I propose:
#+begin_quote
The RFC process described in this document can be amended and must be
by via a subsequent RFC.
#+end_quote
--=20
Suhail
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jan 2025 10:53:57 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 08 05:53:57 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46121 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVThF-0004Be-BH
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 05:53:57 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53854)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tVThC-0004BP-HA
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 05:53:56 -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 1tVTh5-0000dN-8a; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 05:53:47 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=NS4ehewb39rav3YTr2EICSqGD8FV/Dwz3qiSM4Cnyno=; b=SnxYDIPRo4CFO4L8+Ks7
L524wGit+zROft9Kgd/aO+4hasVFYLGHkaFLX+DJTN2drWfx8JTBGL1GhS9GJLcwIhKd/W8NlvaLp
EPRr36UVtuyjd9eusV2n2Bx+7CHm5A+jL6S7V9jK8dVk95GBWRKTnnXFUP9hC7GylTM7a5Gfv1k9g
AUj/yln1+Ci9+XzWAiFicrsfXpr3+muCR6rbOooNlxxGoBA+0Kxy3nQR+6r9tp2jfL5nsxrcc04ML
ad5UgGQf2avV3a3+Toqx2jG4JKkY5UkbAIQBFPiHPqLGfh0XxdKdfKxu7Gh7sj5NdTWPqCY2IeFTB
qbc9U/8AtzEY/A==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?=
=?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Sat, 04 Jan 2025 18:28:05 +0100")
References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 11:53:44 +0100
Message-ID: <877c75vao7.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (---)
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> skribis:
>> Lastly, do we want to move the RFCs to a separate git repository?
>
> I think so. I=E2=80=99ll ask for it on Savannah.
I filed a support request to create it:
https://savannah.nongnu.org/support/?111169
Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jan 2025 06:34:05 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 08 01:34:04 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45750 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVPdk-0000VL-GS
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 01:34:04 -0500
Received: from a2-15.smtp-out.eu-west-1.amazonses.com ([54.240.2.15]:48369)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from
<01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN>)
id 1tVPdh-0000Uj-PH
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 01:34:02 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple;
s=tsl3ypnlx3orlf3fv2rkjjc5b3u22mve; d=housseini.me; t=1736318035;
h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:Mime-Version:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Message-Id;
bh=nsm5g2xfcbe5RsK+JmJWlrnrdRfQdWl+MlKewp5uP2w=;
b=hwNc7CAOAufEipGvQTVJ2CKmxb0zaNQKCeMuLdvWlgMjaQeGx+IcTUIWNesLGHCV
J0luAsz/cxtvTDriCeGo816u2ujeMvdC1yLNLpF6JvtNil98DLJfM79OsYl9S0VZhUD
agA+hg+KhoKCh+KeB/EOQWa6BpmzmbFwqrEONSZM=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple;
s=uku4taia5b5tsbglxyj6zym32efj7xqv; d=amazonses.com; t=1736318035;
h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:Mime-Version:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Message-Id:Feedback-ID;
bh=nsm5g2xfcbe5RsK+JmJWlrnrdRfQdWl+MlKewp5uP2w=;
b=R+RHYgzUAUJRpvbxYVwCj8RGXC77/tIgEWp76fz2W+KM68kmwLYhylTWuvn5Usyf
Ez96aYaVvEGt/aS2iToVycYP3qURz8hqfZrzdkx/yP8D7KKiuXMIBjPMnBdLKD7luCH
l/L2OnFmMGpuA1LKZiWLU/+fPxQEcs1xJaqQusVs=
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
From: =?UTF-8?Q?reza?= <reza@HIDDEN>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?guix-patches=40gnu=2Eorg?= <guix-patches@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?74736=40debbug?= =?UTF-8?Q?s=2Egnu=2Eorg?= <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 06:33:55 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_iNxvoDgtEfkSohj-FRTS+xD1pDdQgmzzM3EngOMoM7sPgeTt"
In-Reply-To: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
<87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<825F8319-4F41-4F4C-81B3-2C84A73A13CF@HIDDEN>
X-Mailer: Amazon WorkMail
Thread-Index: AQHbSWzOtYJZbPAyTQe9/jHYS+WLlQUnqnGBBcdyHAsGCp7ZCw==
Thread-Topic: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
X-Wm-Sent-Timestamp: 1736318034
Message-ID: <01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN>
Feedback-ID: ::1.eu-west-1.b24dn6frgCi6dh20skzbuMRr7UL8M6Soir/3ogtEjHQ=:AmazonSES
X-SES-Outgoing: 2025.01.08-54.240.2.15
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9_Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9_Lop?= =?UTF-8?Q?ez?= <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?Christopher_Baines?= <mail@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?Simon_Tournier?= <zimon.toutoune@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 (-)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. Your mail reader does not
understand MIME message format.
--=_iNxvoDgtEfkSohj-FRTS+xD1pDdQgmzzM3EngOMoM7sPgeTt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks for pushing this forward.
As a maybe tangential comment: There is no mention of an identifier for a=
n RFC (e.g. PEP number) or a unique string to identify or reference it=3F=
On January 6, 2025 11:29:21 PM GMT+01:00, "Ludovic Court=C3=A8s" <ludo@gn=
u.org> wrote:
Hello,
As proposed before, here=E2=80=99s a reworked version based on v5. The i=
ntent
is to keep the spirit and process unchanged compared to v5, while making
=
the document a bit more concise (239 lines, v5 was 322), improving
consistency for key words, hopefully improving wording, fixing
grammatical issues, and adding Markdown ornaments where appropriate.
Notable changes:
=E2=80=A2 Instead of =E2=80=9Csupporter=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cco-suppor=
ter=E2=80=9D, I propose =E2=80=9Cauthor(s)=E2=80=9D and
=E2=80=9Csupporter(s)=E2=80=9D (there must be at least one supporter)=
=2E
=E2=80=A2 Explicitly state the license of RFCs (CC-BY-SA or GFDL).
=E2=80=A2 Clarify that the deliberation period lasts exactly 14 days (w=
as =E2=80=9Cup
to 14 days=E2=80=9D in one place, =E2=80=9C14 days=E2=80=9D in anothe=
r).
=E2=80=A2 Consistently name the different periods.
=E2=80=A2 Remove mention of the =E2=80=98withdrawn/=E2=80=99 directory:=
it=E2=80=99s redundant with
the =E2=80=98status=E2=80=99 header.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify what to do with =E2=80=9Cdeprecated=E2=80=9D RFCs.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify headers of this RFC.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify that this is not just for technical changes.
=20
I can proofread and possibly propose minor tweaks the template
afterwards.
Thoughts=3F
Ludo=E2=80=99.
-- Sent from /e/OS Mail.
--=_iNxvoDgtEfkSohj-FRTS+xD1pDdQgmzzM3EngOMoM7sPgeTt
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head></head><body><div dir=3D"auto">Thanks for pushing this forwar=
d.<br><br>As a maybe tangential comment: There is no mention of an identi=
fier for an RFC (e.g. PEP number) or a unique string to identify or refer=
ence it=3F</div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"auto">On J=
anuary 6, 2025 11:29:21 PM GMT+01:00, "Ludovic Court=C3=A8s" <ludo@gnu=
=2Eorg> wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-le=
ft: 1ex;">
<pre class=3D"k9mail"><div dir=3D"auto">Hello,<br><br>As proposed before,=
here=E2=80=99s a reworked version based on v5. The intent<br>is to keep=
the spirit and process unchanged compared to v5, while making<br>the doc=
ument a bit more concise (239 lines, v5 was 322), improving<br>consistenc=
y for key words, hopefully improving wording, fixing<br>grammatical issue=
s, and adding Markdown ornaments where appropriate.<br><br>Notable change=
s:<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Instead of =E2=80=9Csupporter=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9C=
co-supporter=E2=80=9D, I propose =E2=80=9Cauthor(s)=E2=80=9D and<br> =E2=
=80=9Csupporter(s)=E2=80=9D (there must be at least one supporter).<br><b=
r> =E2=80=A2 Explicitly state the license of RFCs (CC-BY-SA or GFDL).<br=
><br> =E2=80=A2 Clarify that the deliberation period lasts exactly 14 da=
ys (was =E2=80=9Cup<br> to 14 days=E2=80=9D in one place, =E2=80=9C14 =
days=E2=80=9D in another).<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Consistently name the diffe=
rent periods.<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Remove mention of the =E2=80=98withdrawn=
/=E2=80=99 directory: it=E2=80=99s redundant with<br> the =E2=80=98sta=
tus=E2=80=99 header.<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Clarify what to do with =E2=80=9C=
deprecated=E2=80=9D RFCs.<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Clarify headers of this RFC.=
<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Clarify that this is not just for technical changes.<=
br> <br>I can proofread and possibly propose minor tweaks the template<b=
r>afterwards.<br><br>Thoughts=3F<br><br>Ludo=E2=80=99.<br><br></div></pre=
></blockquote></div><div dir=3D"auto">-- Sent from /e/OS Mail.</div></bod=
y></html>
--=_iNxvoDgtEfkSohj-FRTS+xD1pDdQgmzzM3EngOMoM7sPgeTt--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jan 2025 06:34:10 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 08 01:34:10 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45753 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVPdq-0000Vf-17
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 01:34:10 -0500
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:33566)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from
<01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN>)
id 1tVPdo-0000VF-BC
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 01:34:08 -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
<01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN>)
id 1tVPdi-00076r-JD
for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 01:34:02 -0500
Received: from a2-41.smtp-out.eu-west-1.amazonses.com ([54.240.2.41])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from
<01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN>)
id 1tVPdg-0004Lv-JM; Wed, 08 Jan 2025 01:34:02 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple;
s=tsl3ypnlx3orlf3fv2rkjjc5b3u22mve; d=housseini.me; t=1736318035;
h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:Mime-Version:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Message-Id;
bh=nsm5g2xfcbe5RsK+JmJWlrnrdRfQdWl+MlKewp5uP2w=;
b=hwNc7CAOAufEipGvQTVJ2CKmxb0zaNQKCeMuLdvWlgMjaQeGx+IcTUIWNesLGHCV
J0luAsz/cxtvTDriCeGo816u2ujeMvdC1yLNLpF6JvtNil98DLJfM79OsYl9S0VZhUD
agA+hg+KhoKCh+KeB/EOQWa6BpmzmbFwqrEONSZM=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple;
s=uku4taia5b5tsbglxyj6zym32efj7xqv; d=amazonses.com; t=1736318035;
h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:Mime-Version:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Message-Id:Feedback-ID;
bh=nsm5g2xfcbe5RsK+JmJWlrnrdRfQdWl+MlKewp5uP2w=;
b=R+RHYgzUAUJRpvbxYVwCj8RGXC77/tIgEWp76fz2W+KM68kmwLYhylTWuvn5Usyf
Ez96aYaVvEGt/aS2iToVycYP3qURz8hqfZrzdkx/yP8D7KKiuXMIBjPMnBdLKD7luCH
l/L2OnFmMGpuA1LKZiWLU/+fPxQEcs1xJaqQusVs=
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
From: =?UTF-8?Q?reza?= <reza@HIDDEN>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?guix-patches=40gnu=2Eorg?= <guix-patches@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?74736=40debbug?= =?UTF-8?Q?s=2Egnu=2Eorg?= <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 06:33:55 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_iNxvoDgtEfkSohj-FRTS+xD1pDdQgmzzM3EngOMoM7sPgeTt"
In-Reply-To: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
<87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<825F8319-4F41-4F4C-81B3-2C84A73A13CF@HIDDEN>
X-Mailer: Amazon WorkMail
Thread-Index: AQHbSWzOtYJZbPAyTQe9/jHYS+WLlQUnqnGBBcdyHAsGCp7ZCw==
Thread-Topic: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
X-Wm-Sent-Timestamp: 1736318034
Message-ID: <01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN>
Feedback-ID: ::1.eu-west-1.b24dn6frgCi6dh20skzbuMRr7UL8M6Soir/3ogtEjHQ=:AmazonSES
X-SES-Outgoing: 2025.01.08-54.240.2.41
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=54.240.2.41;
envelope-from=01020194449ea437-ba0e47aa-a66a-43a0-9ba8-bdad0f257714-000000@HIDDEN;
helo=a2-41.smtp-out.eu-west-1.amazonses.com
X-Spam_score_int: -20
X-Spam_score: -2.1
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001,
RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9_Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?No=C3=A9_Lop?= =?UTF-8?Q?ez?= <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?Christopher_Baines?= <mail@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?Q?Simon_Tournier?= <zimon.toutoune@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: -0.0 (/)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. Your mail reader does not
understand MIME message format.
--=_iNxvoDgtEfkSohj-FRTS+xD1pDdQgmzzM3EngOMoM7sPgeTt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks for pushing this forward.
As a maybe tangential comment: There is no mention of an identifier for a=
n RFC (e.g. PEP number) or a unique string to identify or reference it=3F=
On January 6, 2025 11:29:21 PM GMT+01:00, "Ludovic Court=C3=A8s" <ludo@gn=
u.org> wrote:
Hello,
As proposed before, here=E2=80=99s a reworked version based on v5. The i=
ntent
is to keep the spirit and process unchanged compared to v5, while making
=
the document a bit more concise (239 lines, v5 was 322), improving
consistency for key words, hopefully improving wording, fixing
grammatical issues, and adding Markdown ornaments where appropriate.
Notable changes:
=E2=80=A2 Instead of =E2=80=9Csupporter=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cco-suppor=
ter=E2=80=9D, I propose =E2=80=9Cauthor(s)=E2=80=9D and
=E2=80=9Csupporter(s)=E2=80=9D (there must be at least one supporter)=
=2E
=E2=80=A2 Explicitly state the license of RFCs (CC-BY-SA or GFDL).
=E2=80=A2 Clarify that the deliberation period lasts exactly 14 days (w=
as =E2=80=9Cup
to 14 days=E2=80=9D in one place, =E2=80=9C14 days=E2=80=9D in anothe=
r).
=E2=80=A2 Consistently name the different periods.
=E2=80=A2 Remove mention of the =E2=80=98withdrawn/=E2=80=99 directory:=
it=E2=80=99s redundant with
the =E2=80=98status=E2=80=99 header.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify what to do with =E2=80=9Cdeprecated=E2=80=9D RFCs.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify headers of this RFC.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify that this is not just for technical changes.
=20
I can proofread and possibly propose minor tweaks the template
afterwards.
Thoughts=3F
Ludo=E2=80=99.
-- Sent from /e/OS Mail.
--=_iNxvoDgtEfkSohj-FRTS+xD1pDdQgmzzM3EngOMoM7sPgeTt
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head></head><body><div dir=3D"auto">Thanks for pushing this forwar=
d.<br><br>As a maybe tangential comment: There is no mention of an identi=
fier for an RFC (e.g. PEP number) or a unique string to identify or refer=
ence it=3F</div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"auto">On J=
anuary 6, 2025 11:29:21 PM GMT+01:00, "Ludovic Court=C3=A8s" <ludo@gnu=
=2Eorg> wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-le=
ft: 1ex;">
<pre class=3D"k9mail"><div dir=3D"auto">Hello,<br><br>As proposed before,=
here=E2=80=99s a reworked version based on v5. The intent<br>is to keep=
the spirit and process unchanged compared to v5, while making<br>the doc=
ument a bit more concise (239 lines, v5 was 322), improving<br>consistenc=
y for key words, hopefully improving wording, fixing<br>grammatical issue=
s, and adding Markdown ornaments where appropriate.<br><br>Notable change=
s:<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Instead of =E2=80=9Csupporter=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9C=
co-supporter=E2=80=9D, I propose =E2=80=9Cauthor(s)=E2=80=9D and<br> =E2=
=80=9Csupporter(s)=E2=80=9D (there must be at least one supporter).<br><b=
r> =E2=80=A2 Explicitly state the license of RFCs (CC-BY-SA or GFDL).<br=
><br> =E2=80=A2 Clarify that the deliberation period lasts exactly 14 da=
ys (was =E2=80=9Cup<br> to 14 days=E2=80=9D in one place, =E2=80=9C14 =
days=E2=80=9D in another).<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Consistently name the diffe=
rent periods.<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Remove mention of the =E2=80=98withdrawn=
/=E2=80=99 directory: it=E2=80=99s redundant with<br> the =E2=80=98sta=
tus=E2=80=99 header.<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Clarify what to do with =E2=80=9C=
deprecated=E2=80=9D RFCs.<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Clarify headers of this RFC.=
<br><br> =E2=80=A2 Clarify that this is not just for technical changes.<=
br> <br>I can proofread and possibly propose minor tweaks the template<b=
r>afterwards.<br><br>Thoughts=3F<br><br>Ludo=E2=80=99.<br><br></div></pre=
></blockquote></div><div dir=3D"auto">-- Sent from /e/OS Mail.</div></bod=
y></html>
--=_iNxvoDgtEfkSohj-FRTS+xD1pDdQgmzzM3EngOMoM7sPgeTt--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Jan 2025 19:40:32 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 07 14:40:32 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44759 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tVFRI-00028S-0L for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2025 14:40:32 -0500 Received: from sender4-of-o51.zoho.com ([136.143.188.51]:21178) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <rekado@HIDDEN>) id 1tVFRG-00028D-EQ for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2025 14:40:30 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1736278818; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=Z2UauJisDBJHXxGIWadrDh7mQuf0bOnY2PLuqWWNqN3bsVU6Hke9dxzsnK1rJLqthp1KMpp3xHzCaxMg6cmhHvrN0fEEXtUCiMetxkWyb9USbdq2VMX+4tEkfOzliEvmn1yCTsnz/6QoYdmEasxz/saEbdW5Maa/U9cO1Qn4eM4= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1736278818; h=Content-Type:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:From:From:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:Subject:To:To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=UnyUn+OkURiELZJr/rQclLXOmUC7Hg6XKyc2cZsWSF8=; b=LV9n8VKkKgbcvZRvMTTWKrBy6RC/MHkrgG6aRkdgT3iSYItAN2FDf2PVbG7h3z3eDm87TLAMZfeZJcROTgsUUM8tDElPNA959wI2BGFseuS1jyga319sIo7qCDbsWW2FEfUfwaHpp8cghbvgxJB48xW7m12ujbNbMyFDBRHtvRU= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@HIDDEN; dmarc=pass header.from=<rekado@HIDDEN> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1736278818; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@HIDDEN; h=From:From:To:To:Cc:Cc:Subject:Subject:Date:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=UnyUn+OkURiELZJr/rQclLXOmUC7Hg6XKyc2cZsWSF8=; b=FKAj3MfytDKXO8kPYESzI7O3Z/QrMmTTxLAizP7qKWTQIcROW3F7BW7SDFezzaPv sUYliepC98xcRtlIGXzoKHjeiTI6wpmlxZUqMFYuy6ivtc3JR1vLWzpNlNIdCXPdVsW 6PKYiSnRI6DclRJJK/1TaCQqcItaPlGu2sejf89A= Received: by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1736278816110378.1639460702454; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:40:16 -0800 (PST) From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Add Request-For-Comment process. User-Agent: mu4e 1.12.7; emacs 29.4 Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2025 20:40:09 +0100 Message-ID: <87jzb6mmzq.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Zoho-Virus-Status: 1 X-Zoho-AV-Stamp: zmail-av-1.3.1/236.218.95 X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: noelopez@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, zimon.toutoune@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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support. This is an important step towards formalizing consent-based decision making. Our community has become too big to do without an explicit process along these lines. Thank you for making the effort to lay out this process! This specific implementation also looks good to me. =2D-=20 Ricardo --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQFHBAEBCgAxFiEEvKaJtjZVOAHDxiFQGXpYiCNfrKwFAmd9gxkTHHJla2Fkb0Bl bGVwaGx5Lm5ldAAKCRAZeliII1+srDLkB/4qxha+70Zpg3bvD4j1dEDehlJ17Mlw LNH/1Tq6s76C6D5zYgJx+vIMQJaoTnjaVgmzkKKko+SQD5DagbKL8ydyqYrYH03G ModpJATZBdLMldBf8XEFlNAxvpyWjG5wgWZEMpZO1nMRkkMGwN4s1uuv6Lbb8CPS /eGulaIfZmVVgliZ5hwu/K/R+U3+D8WHuR/q1I/j+CYWjyIxaJDfgnsJC+sAHfet C01uFCcHzRJVrZHZjh9Kt0/7G6v8CdmHYfSZlUEujP7azJ9j5oU28BJyP36kKk8O L7zhNHPRMlwI0vOayiWIyX4b+O88CJGhF11tZmEynU2ZBhoqS0U28Kg1 =5Ddz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Jan 2025 17:05:50 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 07 12:05:50 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44433 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tVD1Z-0001oN-1M
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2025 12:05:49 -0500
Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([2a01:5b40:0:3006::1]:38962)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tVD1W-0001o9-C1
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2025 12:05:48 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:
MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:From:
Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:
Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:
References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:
List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=3XU2BBF9J14mrAcboFvPNqKbGp4Leto0nMG2vvRf+Co=; b=M
BDeKyp+lQqh19dTLcXg9Y2PZ6UtH+2UFIp9Tfn5kxnJbrwuIERXmHeHFGIrzQ6oWLVp78z0J7fFqS
2EtcTht7MN2B5dNEAx7Tn9g3FjRdkna5M5s4QPa6V0kbaT3VA5zcu8Heg4yN5gSNMX4dJ3dvZ2mrT
K2xlxC2hzRPFlltoIxG6jw22W+YtKqbEtSUlTW84fvIMLVE5g3vHew0qwLlWHnOaY/WC216LbuZuH
+BZQIZN986Ih9brCZkVeiMiDEkSon8xE2n+tSl+N+6K5mnJe0UAzwsVh0BIeW1pUYOSUom+BSuytf
t0N1nAGG52vstYfLuU4MHkqCXjFHV2u3g==;
Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95)
id 1tVD1Q-002ovm-8E; Tue, 07 Jan 2025 18:05:40 +0100
From: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
In-Reply-To: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
<87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2025 18:06:45 +0100
Message-ID: <87h66aime2.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: 74736
Cc: Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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:
> Hello,
>
> As proposed before, here=E2=80=99s a reworked version based on v5. The i=
ntent
> is to keep the spirit and process unchanged compared to v5, while making
> the document a bit more concise (239 lines, v5 was 322), improving
> consistency for key words, hopefully improving wording, fixing
> grammatical issues, and adding Markdown ornaments where appropriate.
>
> Notable changes:
>
> =E2=80=A2 Instead of =E2=80=9Csupporter=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cco-suppor=
ter=E2=80=9D, I propose =E2=80=9Cauthor(s)=E2=80=9D and
> =E2=80=9Csupporter(s)=E2=80=9D (there must be at least one supporter).
>
> =E2=80=A2 Explicitly state the license of RFCs (CC-BY-SA or GFDL).
>
> =E2=80=A2 Clarify that the deliberation period lasts exactly 14 days (w=
as =E2=80=9Cup
> to 14 days=E2=80=9D in one place, =E2=80=9C14 days=E2=80=9D in anothe=
r).
>
> =E2=80=A2 Consistently name the different periods.
>
> =E2=80=A2 Remove mention of the =E2=80=98withdrawn/=E2=80=99 directory:=
it=E2=80=99s redundant with
> the =E2=80=98status=E2=80=99 header.
>
> =E2=80=A2 Clarify what to do with =E2=80=9Cdeprecated=E2=80=9D RFCs.
>
> =E2=80=A2 Clarify headers of this RFC.
>
> =E2=80=A2 Clarify that this is not just for technical changes.
>=20=20=20
> I can proofread and possibly propose minor tweaks the template
> afterwards.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Ludo=E2=80=99.
This is great, thanks! A few comments below:
>
> title: Requests-for-Comment Process
> id: 000
001, since the template takes id 0000 for ease of access.
> status: submitted
> discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
> authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
> supporters: ?
> submitted: 2024-12-12
> date: 2025-01-15
It=E2=80=99s a good place to add:
SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 OR GFDL-1.3-no-invariants-only
> ---
>
> # Summary
>
> This document describes the _request for comments_ (RFC) process of the
> Guix project. The RFC process is intended to provide a consistent and
> structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
> affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
> on important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to
> weigh in.
>
> # Motivation
>
> Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
> review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
> does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
> keep track of all of them.
>
> The RFC process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
> =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the commun=
ity at large
> and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
> discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
>
> A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only b=
e reverted at a
> high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
> disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
>
> =E2=80=93 changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
> - adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
> - changing the channel mechanism;
> - changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
> deprecation policy, or this very document;
> - changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
> lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.)
Missing a dot at the end of the sentence.
> # Detailed Design
>
> ## When to Follow This Process
>
> The RFC process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, wh=
ich include:
>
> - changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
> (command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
> - big restructuring of packages;
> - hard to revert changes;
> - significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
> - governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
>
> Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
> RFC first.
>
> Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require an RFC; examples include:
>
> - adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
> - fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
> interfaces;
> - updating the manual, updating translations;
> - changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure
> in a user-invisible way.
>
> These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
> by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
>
> ## How the Process Works
>
> 1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/requests-for-comments.git .
Why the alone dot?
> 2. Copy `0000-template.md` to `00XY-short-name.md` where `short-name`
> is a short descriptive name long and `XY` is the sequence number.
> 3. Write your RFC following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The RFC mu=
st not
> be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
> implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
> deprecate a previously-accepted RFC, it must explicitly say so.
> 4. Submit the RFC as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
> 5. Announce your RFC at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *supporters*:
> one or more people who will support the RFC and participate in
> discussions by your side (see below).
>
> The RFC is *submitted* once it has at least one supporter in addition to
> the author(s).
>
So we are now three authors and no supporters for this RFC? Could we
say that more than one author also works for submitting?
> ## Supporters
>
> A supporter is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project=E2=80=
=99s
> practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a team
> member. Supporters do not have to agree with all the points of the RFC
> but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions are a good
> thing for the community.
>
> Supporters help the author(s) by participating in discussions, amending
> the document as it is being discussed, and acting as timekeepers.
>
> ## Timeline
>
> The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following recommended
> periods:
>
> 
>
> ```dot <- TODO: make this a separate file
> digraph "RFC Timeline" {
> submission[label=3D<Submission Period<br />up to 7=C2=A0days>]
> comments[label=3D<Discussion Period<br />30=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>]
> deliberation[label=3D<Deliberation Period<br />14=C2=A0days>]
> withdrawn[label=3DWithdrawn, shape=3Drectangle]
> final[label=3DFinal, shape=3Drectangle]
>=20=20=20=20=20
> submission -> comments
> submission -> withdrawn
> comments -> deliberation
> deliberation -> withdrawn
> deliberation -> final
>=20=20=20=20=20
> withdrawn -> submission [label=3D"New version"]
>=20=20=20=20=20
> comments -> withdrawn
> }
> ```
>
> The subsections below detail the various stages and their duration.
>
> ### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
>
> Anyone can author and submit an RFC as a regular patch and look for
> supporters (see below). The RFC is *submitted* once it has one or more
> supporters; the next step is the *discussion period*.
>
> Author(s) may withdraw their RFC at any time; they can resubmit it again
> later, possibly under a new RFC number.
>
> ### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
>
> Once submitted, the RFC is publicly discussed; authors are encouraged to
> publish updated versions incorporating feedback during the discussion.
>
> Once the discussion settles, at the latest after 60 days, the author(s)
> publish a final version, leading to the *deliberation period*.
>
> ### Deliberation Period (14 days)
>
> All members of any team of the Guix project can participate in
> deliberation and are encouraged to do so.
>
> Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
> one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the RFC:
>
> - =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal);
This parenthesis is alone.
> - =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementa=
tion of the
> proposal;
> - =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementa=
tion of the
> proposal. A team member sending this reply must have actively
> proposed alternative solutions during the discussion period.
>
> The RFC is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
> reply, and (2) no one disagrees. In other cases, the RFC is
> *withdrawn*.
>
> Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Makin=
g=E2=80=9D
> below.
>
> RFC acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
> the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
> the participants consent to its implementation.
>
> Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it
> could mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in
> the RFC are accepted by the community.
>
> ## Decision Making
>
> Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
> consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions
> that everyone can live with.
>
> Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
> are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
> disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
> proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
>
> To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
> details, you are encouraged to read
> https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus .
Another alone dot =F0=9F=A4=94
>
> ## Merging Final RFCs
>
> Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a committer merges the final RFC
> following these steps:
>
> 1. filling in the remaining metadata in the RFC headers (changing the
> `status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
> discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
> previously-accepted RFCs are deprecated by this new RFC, change the
> `status` header accordingly);
> 2. committing everything;
> 3. announcing the publication of the RFC.
>
> All the RFCs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
> Attribution-ShareAlike
> 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
> [GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
> Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
> Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html).
I would add =E2=80=9Cor (at your option) any later version.=E2=80=9D
>
> ## RFC Template
>
> The expected structure of RFCs is captured by the template in the file
> `0000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown ornaments.
Ornament is a complicated word, I would replace it with =E2=80=9Csyntax=E2=
=80=9D.
>
> ## Cost of Reverting
>
> The RFC process described in this documented can be amended by
> subsequent RFCs.
>
> ## Drawbacks
>
> There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more=
than
> it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to he=
lp
> contribution, not an end in itself.
>
> Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
> collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices
> and notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon,
> and solicit opinions of those who remained silent.
>
> ## Open Issues
>
> There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
> While we want to ensure that technical changes that affect users are
> well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become un=
duly
> burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to
> maintain moving forward.
Thanks for the v6, apart from my comments I think its great and ready to
be submitted :)
In my opinion there are too many unnecessary emphasis (mostly with `),
but I will live with it.
Have a nice day,
No=C3=A9
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 22:29:39 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 17:29:39 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40899 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tUvbO-00075o-H8
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 17:29:39 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58308)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tUvbL-00075W-MA
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 17:29:37 -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 1tUvbD-0001ek-Bk; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 17:29:27 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=ofhXmokdSszedHpm/yzWtMTsJI+3lywVOHXmmNNM180=; b=fmmvWnT8XyARQvsM2zkF
uQF5nKSIPZCpcLKh4hjjbdXSPQ1jPx0fpRlyRi3mqg1ct7IFrYdCvWfNF5fJQ30DV72NwyoxNLViz
JXi+WyrC4nCdsVLtmagvlM/Ej4wb5Gv50JvaqLdFmwv4rVRSJzlK779jvNVqp5iIAMK5QS0xaeK6h
ZOFZgZ0tjD5eN0+1/HpC0d7E+YyISILb4BG0jIC82E9/EYRB/n+gtDVCrVg78A2a8FW40F/s77A8c
OcfP21wr+X7ue8zagtkaTDoEZgZaJtzXfS4pfos4RCUt7ZhnwZMR2EEdRjjgJjk/Mv9NNCzRt87tC
oV30lHGwtlhjcw==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.
In-Reply-To: <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
(Simon Tournier's message of "Fri, 3 Jan 2025 19:14:40 +0100")
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 23:29:21 +0100
Message-ID: <87y0zn4lvi.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (---)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,
As proposed before, here=E2=80=99s a reworked version based on v5. The int=
ent
is to keep the spirit and process unchanged compared to v5, while making
the document a bit more concise (239 lines, v5 was 322), improving
consistency for key words, hopefully improving wording, fixing
grammatical issues, and adding Markdown ornaments where appropriate.
Notable changes:
=E2=80=A2 Instead of =E2=80=9Csupporter=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cco-supporte=
r=E2=80=9D, I propose =E2=80=9Cauthor(s)=E2=80=9D and
=E2=80=9Csupporter(s)=E2=80=9D (there must be at least one supporter).
=E2=80=A2 Explicitly state the license of RFCs (CC-BY-SA or GFDL).
=E2=80=A2 Clarify that the deliberation period lasts exactly 14 days (was=
=E2=80=9Cup
to 14 days=E2=80=9D in one place, =E2=80=9C14 days=E2=80=9D in another).
=E2=80=A2 Consistently name the different periods.
=E2=80=A2 Remove mention of the =E2=80=98withdrawn/=E2=80=99 directory: i=
t=E2=80=99s redundant with
the =E2=80=98status=E2=80=99 header.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify what to do with =E2=80=9Cdeprecated=E2=80=9D RFCs.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify headers of this RFC.
=E2=80=A2 Clarify that this is not just for technical changes.
=20=20
I can proofread and possibly propose minor tweaks the template
afterwards.
Thoughts?
Ludo=E2=80=99.
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=rfc-v6.md
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
title: Requests-for-Comment Process
id: 000
status: submitted
discussion: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
authors: Simon Tournier, No=C3=A9 Lopez, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s
supporters: ?
submitted: 2024-12-12
date: 2025-01-15
---
# Summary
This document describes the _request for comments_ (RFC) process of the
Guix project. The RFC process is intended to provide a consistent and
structured way to propose, discuss, and decide on major changes
affecting the project. It aims to draw attention of community members
on important decisions, technical or not, and to give them a chance to
weigh in.
# Motivation
Day-to-day work on Guix revolves around informal interactions, peer
review, and consensus-based decision making. As the community grows, so
does the stream of proposed changes, and no single person is able to
keep track of all of them.
The RFC process is a mechanism to determine whether a proposed change is
=E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D enough to require attention from the communit=
y at large
and if so, to provide a documented way to bring about broad community
discussion and to collectively decide on the proposal.
A change may be deemed =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D when it could only be =
reverted at a
high cost or, for technical changes, when it has the potential to
disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
- changing the `<package>` record type and/or its interfaces;
- adding or removing a `guix` sub-command;
- changing the channel mechanism;
- changing project governance policy such as teams, decision making, the
deprecation policy, or this very document;
- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure (mailing
lists, source code repository and forge, continuous integration, etc.)
# Detailed Design
## When to Follow This Process
The RFC process applies only to =E2=80=9Csignificant=E2=80=9D changes, whic=
h include:
- changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
(command-line interfaces, core Scheme interfaces);
- big restructuring of packages;
- hard to revert changes;
- significant project infrastructure or workflow changes;
- governance or changes to the way we collaborate.
Someone submitting a patch for any such change may be asked to submit an
RFC first.
Most day-to-day contributions do *not* require an RFC; examples include:
- adding or updating packages, removing outdated packages;
- fixing security issues and bugs in a way that does not change
interfaces;
- updating the manual, updating translations;
- changing the configuration of systems part of project infrastructure
in a user-invisible way.
These day-to-day contributions remain governed by the process described
by the manual in its =E2=80=9CContributing=E2=80=9D chapter.
## How the Process Works
1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix/requests-for-comments.git .
2. Copy `0000-template.md` to `00XY-short-name.md` where `short-name`
is a short descriptive name long and `XY` is the sequence number.
3. Write your RFC following the template=E2=80=99s structure. The RFC must=
not
be prospective; it must formalize an idea and sketch a plan to
implement it, even if not all details are known. If it intends to
deprecate a previously-accepted RFC, it must explicitly say so.
4. Submit the RFC as a patch to `guix-patches@HIDDEN`.
5. Announce your RFC at `guix-devel@HIDDEN` and look for *supporters*:
one or more people who will support the RFC and participate in
discussions by your side (see below).
The RFC is *submitted* once it has at least one supporter in addition to
the author(s).
## Supporters
A supporter is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project=E2=80=
=99s
practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a team
member. Supporters do not have to agree with all the points of the RFC
but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions are a good
thing for the community.
Supporters help the author(s) by participating in discussions, amending
the document as it is being discussed, and acting as timekeepers.
## Timeline
The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following recommended
periods:
```dot <- TODO: make this a separate file
digraph "RFC Timeline" {
submission[label=3D<Submission Period<br />up to 7=C2=A0days>]
comments[label=3D<Discussion Period<br />30=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>]
deliberation[label=3D<Deliberation Period<br />14=C2=A0days>]
withdrawn[label=3DWithdrawn, shape=3Drectangle]
final[label=3DFinal, shape=3Drectangle]
=20=20=20=20
submission -> comments
submission -> withdrawn
comments -> deliberation
deliberation -> withdrawn
deliberation -> final
=20=20=20=20
withdrawn -> submission [label=3D"New version"]
=20=20=20=20
comments -> withdrawn
}
```
The subsections below detail the various stages and their duration.
### Submission Period (up to 7 days)
Anyone can author and submit an RFC as a regular patch and look for
supporters (see below). The RFC is *submitted* once it has one or more
supporters; the next step is the *discussion period*.
Author(s) may withdraw their RFC at any time; they can resubmit it again
later, possibly under a new RFC number.
### Discussion Period (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
Once submitted, the RFC is publicly discussed; authors are encouraged to
publish updated versions incorporating feedback during the discussion.
Once the discussion settles, at the latest after 60 days, the author(s)
publish a final version, leading to the *deliberation period*.
### Deliberation Period (14 days)
All members of any team of the Guix project can participate in
deliberation and are encouraged to do so.
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to send
one of the following replies on the patch-tracking entry of the RFC:
- =E2=80=9CI support=E2=80=9D, meaning that one supports the proposal);
- =E2=80=9CI accept=E2=80=9D, meaning that one consents to the implementati=
on of the
proposal;
- =E2=80=9CI disapprove=E2=80=9D, meaning that one opposes the implementati=
on of the
proposal. A team member sending this reply must have actively
proposed alternative solutions during the discussion period.
The RFC is *accepted* if (1) at least 25% of all team members send a
reply, and (2) no one disagrees. In other cases, the RFC is
*withdrawn*.
Deliberation aims at consolidating consensus; see =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
below.
RFC acceptance is not a rubber stamp; in particular, it does not mean
the proposal will effectively be implemented, but it does mean that all
the participants consent to its implementation.
Similarly, withdrawal does not necessarily equate with rejection; it
could mean that more discussion and thought is needed before ideas in
the RFC are accepted by the community.
## Decision Making
Contributors and even more so team members are expected to help build
consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding solutions
that everyone can live with.
Thus, no decision is made against significant concerns; these concerns
are actively resolved through counter proposals. A deliberating member
disapproving a proposal bears a responsibility for finding alternatives,
proposing ideas or code, or explaining the rationale for the status quo.
To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
details, you are encouraged to read
https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus .
## Merging Final RFCs
Whether it is accepted or withdrawn, a committer merges the final RFC
following these steps:
1. filling in the remaining metadata in the RFC headers (changing the
`status` to `accepted` or `withdrawn`; adding the URL of the
discussion in the `discussion` header; updating the `date` header; if
previously-accepted RFCs are deprecated by this new RFC, change the
`status` header accordingly);
2. committing everything;
3. announcing the publication of the RFC.
All the RFCs are dual-licensed under the [Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike
4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) license and the
[GNU Free Documentation License 1.3, with no Invariant Sections, no
Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover
Texts](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html).
## RFC Template
The expected structure of RFCs is captured by the template in the file
`0000-template.md`, written in English with Markdown ornaments.
## Cost of Reverting
The RFC process described in this documented can be amended by
subsequent RFCs.
## Drawbacks
There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more t=
han
it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help
contribution, not an end in itself.
Discussions could easily have a low signal-to-noise ratio. We will
collectively pay attention to over- and under-representation of voices
and notably avoid repeating arguments, avoid using exclusionary jargon,
and solicit opinions of those who remained silent.
## Open Issues
There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process.
While we want to ensure that technical changes that affect users are
well-considered, we certainly don=E2=80=99t want the process to become undu=
ly
burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to
maintain moving forward.
--=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 17:40:32 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 12:40:32 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39901 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tUr5b-0000lf-Si for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 12:40:32 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58562) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tUr5Z-0000lJ-OB for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 12:40:30 -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 1tUr5S-0005WK-87; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 12:40:22 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=WrqqBfzifQmAYz1Qdf/XJymlnVrU7ISyzaeGABs+Utc=; b=jPakL5gTMMdiwrkiVAmR tb3PKsPLIz0CWJOsboF/bl2JoIZsE2nueHKJx2hS1ZdWXrLBYc4XvtIyWVEHNdS9gqzV+Weqg2OMQ VgvO37g9U6zW/a+ykmLqvVjfRuzxMfuylAobRqQOeQaO9Sj1TqJCau5pMYVNvveRqWjSJFaorMU+J FSm3SnQBjcnmrVG9/LPCspZwrx0t2oah0FQU0ZCftH3zibhgCwpxTv2KcjJwuXxqtUVrxjVRqstbj +bVyUkap1yUEvjW/P1Txvx3Hhm2viaN8E9tskEsP7YCnSK8hqr/Iip4Hzy06J/FnkKmt0Uoh9VI5W pX+cfP0wsKU38g==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87v7utxw2a.fsf@HIDDEN> (=?utf-8?Q?=22No=C3=A9?= Lopez"'s message of "Sun, 05 Jan 2025 13:51:57 +0100") References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> <87v7utxw2a.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 18:40:14 +0100 Message-ID: <871pxf7se9.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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, No=C3=A9 Lopez <noe@no=C3=A9.eu> skribis: > To take a realistic example, say I make an RFC for P2P substitute > distribution with GNUNet/ERIS, this is a big change that requires an RFC > but I have trouble imagining that ten people in the team members are > interested in that. > > Teams are specialized after all, if I add myself to the games team it > doesn=E2=80=99t mean I care about RFCs for what would be the core team. Yes. I=E2=80=99m not sure about this particular example though: *if* this is implemented as an opt-in functionality, it=E2=80=99s not necessarily a =E2= =80=9Cbig change=E2=80=9D in that (1) it=E2=80=99s disabled by default, and (2) it co= uld be removed entirely from the code base anytime. So under these conditions, it would not even qualify for the RFC process. Conversely, the examples given in the current RFC draft really have an impact on everyone and are hard or impossible to revert. > That said I trust your experience to find a quorum that works and if you > think ten is realistic then go for it. I don=E2=80=99t have experience but I think that we want to make sure there= =E2=80=99s enough community input. This will require publicity about each RFC and probably we=E2=80=99ll have to do some web/automation work to help publiciz= e new RFCs and RFC status changes. Fundamentally, we need to view ourselves as a community with shared goals, making decisions together=E2=80=94that is what it means to be a =E2= =80=9Cmember=E2=80=9D of the project. Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 10:29:59 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 05:29:59 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36780 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tUkMx-0003DZ-5c for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 05:29:59 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x330.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::330]:42278) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tUkMu-0003DH-Lo for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 05:29:58 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x330.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4361b6f9faeso85404605e9.1 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 02:29:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736159390; x=1736764190; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=odI5mG7AJbvx5sSncQTvYCvjX1YgqipIt7Yl9jVWe7A=; b=lsGPAmmYdQoGfCT7MVt8sRovcPfhf5fTEQELcNdLeqOOnJNoknWPYI1sjDsx00mDBL JLl3DEUdkAvw7KKfbzejslDpm34zqwdF7meZlX0h/THIkIJui88TeotdueaFLtxOIuOK BS/u6kD7QNQPsU2ovZ/7d/C2qZkSIKpE6rZXWBPW6ty15e4uJxE19P5JePzu0Jl4dZc+ cSBur4rVJsWQZb/4o3HT6rNzZxQBspqB2icIclnK8Wpuh+Lubp+s5Liab1QPKITS/y+W XSoGTI4YHQSHXaiGKUYG5NgsdePYdQ+o+gGhTM88JxBZy232aTV2BbP+ugNRiACVyK/I 9kIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736159390; x=1736764190; 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=odI5mG7AJbvx5sSncQTvYCvjX1YgqipIt7Yl9jVWe7A=; b=R9oh4IL2J2RmqCmiFzZdroC4uTyZMYejncQ+KeXVaEy+qUMWYUEvgPPlOWezitCFTZ fwI9nR/0xuMzIly7JanHWfmai2CmXB6Hw1EVEF+Q08ef9l2TdsPQjXL4rs5QGLlJCfSu bwurDYEWRJPK2OuAMrBHZ1GOmu0KiB8t6MD+zVC0D25hcSwrzdwgyfXbrrZM8uA6CQWZ +KQZxlWNBVbKNTUWTmxNxK5Ot4O0kKpjD1olNJeo8uLoOhw9NGSs2oDzFbNx060VXhpT bB1hdO7dCKWhB5Tmy8uN52cDRwDs7cJTXqZiHsvuqKx03Z2urIZjJg70fRBw1SPoBpm2 GXZg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw5lIJrLr1MhRwlm/4qdQmADN3r7+dZ4tOj7b+TD+Y5ah0dUXEc Y9glSUTjT3BkzuJTP1BLT1G2zaq+9qgVNU2Oy9KePt2y1LtkDWrUamMYPg== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvjtC/qVI0PWmteGNqAHkOyPDAXQgbuO0qfjRTD0bQ1EbPipGy+tZQrrmIlJke evNfAdBY/yUBRNOr6Rhh18kuOpmaTwUweZGn+u2LiXYJEEpTtV8Ls/zuy6DvM8BUgCbkfo1OBwG MskZICbcWLMBNXcVJh7k6cwhLWTCa7eR5esHcpPwjpqd9XpUj0UbWMLqO7F2hEQyHEhtWZhtliT LTDh8regVs2mQvDLZwPsq8jrk5pJTg1P9NdUEm0goSXzyh+PNwC2kDsmyLoK1QPvEpfAqwr2rn4 18wO8HIH6RAm71+Jj72sS25dRoTZ90GJwABZsBCYXw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFYg95f1Oh5kxs6ub69M8D41jD//aPaSbU+ZAFfqiqqM5G4IdVnQtut158J2uqrASAHG45H+A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3b26:b0:434:fa73:a906 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436697f8e14mr376253095e9.4.1736159390034; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 02:29:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-47.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr. [194.254.61.47]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-43656af6c4esm598298445e9.4.2025.01.06.02.29.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 06 Jan 2025 02:29:49 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Cour?= =?utf-8?Q?t=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87v7utxw2a.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> <87v7utxw2a.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 11:29:44 +0100 Message-ID: <874j2cz147.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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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 No=C3=A9, On Sun, 05 Jan 2025 at 13:51, No=C3=A9 Lopez via Guix-patches via <guix-pat= ches@HIDDEN> wrote: > To take a realistic example, say I make an RFC for P2P substitute > distribution with GNUNet/ERIS, this is a big change that requires an RFC > but I have trouble imagining that ten people in the team members are > interested in that. > > Teams are specialized after all, if I add myself to the games team it > doesn=E2=80=99t mean I care about RFCs for what would be the core team. Well, considering this example, I remember a session at Guix Days last year (or last last year?) when pukkamustard explained ERIS. If I remember correctly, we were more than 10 people and after the explanations and questions/answers, we had an informed opinion; I mean I guess most attendees were able to express either Support, Accept or Disagree. For sure, the number of people able to tackle all the implementation details is probably lower than 10. However, I am confident that more than 10 team members are skilled enough to build a consensus on any topic*. Today, merging a patch is done using =E2=80=9CLazy Consensus=E2=80=9C: it a= ssumes general consent if no responses are posted within a defined period (15 days). For =E2=80=9Csignificant changes=E2=80=9D, we are looking for a =E2=80=9CCo= nsensus Approval=E2=80=9D. Therefore, we need a way to define this =E2=80=9CConsensus Approval=E2=80= =9D. That=E2=80=99s what it=E2=80=99s named =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D: after a =E2= =80=9CComment Period=E2=80=9D where we all try to forge an informed opinion (if we are not an expert on the topic at hand), then we express what we judge the best for the project. That=E2=80=99s said, maybe 25% is too much? What does it appear to you bet= ter? Cheers, simon PS: About =E2=80=9CLazy Consensus=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CConsensus Approval= =E2=80=9D, see Apache [1]. :-) *build consensus on any topic: FWIW, I have seen random citizens without apriori knowledge took complex decisions in Court about crime. 1: https://community.apache.org/committers/decisionMaking.html
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Jan 2025 12:50:41 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jan 05 07:50:41 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60303 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tUQ5Z-00014X-85 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 07:50:41 -0500 Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([2a01:5b40:0:3006::1]:56794) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tUQ5V-000146-Or for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 07:50:38 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:From: Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=NSJDDCNHoxHemdlq5/36moElLv9Qmk8ow78mQXhyx58=; b=C kU3AxU5aG1H52ZYEak79UP5IvGBFNpFjY14mZqHMLq7TghCM1EpNxQTyrSuKz3AhtfTojE/mznL3l V4ZfhXBXcBjAduPI/MGItRIXVgMy0Bx67TGtNZ0iyS7DYjIGp67qizb7zw3hiSbLgst2L5FOiY8Vo zlqFrWawdQrKQ9zF3CPAwQATMGyVLSlB0OzhuGFkVoEjOVkNUNo65z/jHjJQe8cNAOvUQYFGXEkei 8epsQnR/bK8y9Q+XcPHjC+U1sybTYfmedb4sX2GSxuou7GCRLQvlNxftsq+wbzDjk3aR8WY1ZO9Oe fTebn1XgPMZHpuwTciczbnVFoPPB7N+Ag==; Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1tUQ5P-005q7a-D1; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 13:50:31 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2025 13:51:57 +0100 Message-ID: <87v7utxw2a.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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-) >> Half of the committers is 25 people (based on .guix-authorizations), and >> a quarter of the team members is 10. Personnally, I have trouble >> imagining that this amount of people will come to send a mail to the >> RFC. > > So are you saying you=E2=80=99d want no quorum at all? (Your revision st= ill > reads =E2=80=9C50% committers=E2=80=9D.) To take a realistic example, say I make an RFC for P2P substitute distribution with GNUNet/ERIS, this is a big change that requires an RFC but I have trouble imagining that ten people in the team members are interested in that. Teams are specialized after all, if I add myself to the games team it doesn=E2=80=99t mean I care about RFCs for what would be the core team. That said I trust your experience to find a quorum that works and if you think ten is realistic then go for it. >> Lastly, do we want to move the RFCs to a separate git repository? > > I think so. I=E2=80=99ll ask for it on Savannah. > Great! Have a nice day, No=C3=A9
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jan 2025 17:28:48 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 04 12:28:48 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57072 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tU7xA-0003NC-7Z for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 12:28:48 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49690) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tU7x1-0003Mp-4g for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 12:28:45 -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 1tU7ws-0000Xe-UE; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 12:28:30 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=TmVJ586Xv0Wd6Irrz8tGzxTKgj+FbdEFx6QfH+xcyLU=; b=p0mk/wZT/bvH76BOd50G 0N0KZNCU/EqFutfyL/nONgzkiUNRl5vIcsCj4EpyFvKoXTdClLXrnYXfLIoXREmwzei6o+fvH+VGl Wry89Q6/24SFhNv8Y3kTMW/nlaW3HCntD/9nbLicnvfMuzKD5s0uP5ECApFyeLiSOMiywx+khyMYd FchNSFry6rf6GoCLGq9ZABOPGssZ3IgUUkfcNTFpSYPJwnDzJTIIBX4UzXTUH0u6TuRhhKKHsyeia Y1eIGP/Jc4awVGGqeiYyWv+ozF31qnfHXWgcM9B36u7oIWKIn0BsgMV5tGB0NIelVvysU4CMsEI7q 38a1C2pOoj1lJw==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> (=?utf-8?Q?=22No=C3=A9?= Lopez"'s message of "Mon, 30 Dec 2024 12:58:46 +0100") References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Quintidi 15 =?utf-8?Q?Niv=C3=B4se?= an 233 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour du Lapin 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: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 18:28:05 +0100 Message-ID: <87ttaeqyje.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (---) No=C3=A9 Lopez <noe@no=C3=A9.eu> skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes: > >> OK. As I wrote in my reply to Simon, my thought here was that =E2=80=9C= voting=E2=80=9D* >> would give a clear and unambiguous way, not subject to interpretation, >> to decide whether the RFC is withdrawn: it=E2=80=99s easier to add numbe= rs than >> to determine whether =E2=80=9Ca positive consensus is reached=E2=80=9D (= current >> wording). >> > > This is why an ACK/NACK system works great in my opinion: you send =E2=80= =9CACK=E2=80=9D > or =E2=80=9CNACK=E2=80=9D litteraly so your opinion is clear. And you ca= n just count > the number of each, without implying a vote. OK, got it, we agree on this. >> But I don=E2=80=99t know, I guess that=E2=80=99s an =E2=80=9CI will live= with it=E2=80=9D from me on >> this one. :-) >> >> Two other issue I raised was the quorum: Simon proposed half of the >> committers; I propose 25% of team members. Thoughts? [...] > Half of the committers is 25 people (based on .guix-authorizations), and > a quarter of the team members is 10. Personnally, I have trouble > imagining that this amount of people will come to send a mail to the > RFC. So are you saying you=E2=80=99d want no quorum at all? (Your revision still reads =E2=80=9C50% committers=E2=80=9D.) >> Anyway, I think we should aim for finalization of v1 of the RFC process >> by, say, Jan. 15th. I will dedicate some time to tweak the wording, and >> then we can call it a thing. >> > > Good idea! I=E2=80=99ll be waiting for your v5 then. And then I can bri= ng > back the RFC template. OK, will do in the coming days. >> (A bit sad that it=E2=80=99s just the three of us talking, we wouldn=E2= =80=99t have the >> quorum here=E2=80=A6) >> > > Agreed. > > Lastly, do we want to move the RFCs to a separate git repository? I think so. I=E2=80=99ll ask for it on Savannah. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Jan 2025 18:15:00 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 03 13:15:00 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51992 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tTmCJ-00073k-93
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2025 13:15:00 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::331]:50374)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>)
id 1tTmCF-00073P-Ry
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2025 13:14:57 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-43690d4605dso49732265e9.0
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 03 Jan 2025 10:14:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1735928094; x=1736532894; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc
:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=s5sYvgQO7osKiTdrSBPhncy7ukYSUUJwMsQC6tmfdEE=;
b=LDk7SvtzDCecslZx5hVG5R4K7KXQKOnOJF9BuCG+pzB9V1knFbv3WFHG8GqLGqNYTO
LWS6MG9RSooXWU7CayHCBzrlCDdjL/j13YDIRGOgpwX2uy6wYt/P0bdNz4hbcI5gFaEj
BH+oDfi341eklAevdEcP1PTBmx0vmz+FwU2Dr4fOLwxiqyztp6RaE77Sd7kkIE4gWIr2
iv6iB1rZx3mbTDmAuloRzUegiRZYX9HGDty/97HgSEcWAnIE6A/bmodnpEiWg18JYcos
XvCAQ+tG7M3p3Ay7HewEr4iaMVJBPFxgvoBmz6gx0uPZQWCigounLrbaaIDao5oh42q6
lRRg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1735928094; x=1736532894;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc
:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to;
bh=s5sYvgQO7osKiTdrSBPhncy7ukYSUUJwMsQC6tmfdEE=;
b=cVqr6sobDipaeFJBuMlh5zmKbWQjda1MLjABjLlGBlpJybayWeRAg5EXvAuhmEFPmC
v9dtS5qbvhzRgBAlzOSPj5Y5taV2stMvy7xiDizEpIFCxWVhL2zSlaU0wfzTiu0zb0ux
2BD5M8R50DaS2dzQlvPIYpXTJDhPjq6C539NJWOSobZ9FlYv6XjoDXSlTrW3H5HdtVAo
+eN/raQ0Z5nVadAP1POhOa4DwZvUpLBZT2LteL2U9D8zcXZ2uw0y7nBQz0KXRs4oLcIx
5DgYQLe8R0co0q4/fOfp/pLu5RNALBrQBBJhBppxSroZRY8B3/XOeWN/3dvVbl6Nw8Kh
0Efw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzwqfvVWm51VwR48prxocupj+C4/zDtd8XgAyQz9GE9j8yZ+c0H
RbzvukpnNi9K2KPOPdfIwdipnKpN9Ep89gxk8kOLv3MjtU1pvpprbctoEQ==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncv9fp7IRnhoADtEeHNoIhjubZ5Czyc841amNpT3KXOQmV86Z5pcPb9BcIpwNjg
TVL980xoyk7c8ZnvzuBkOLBc/uqo2goug9zPRfVFFC1zKhAddnn66yCcmJEPzPemcbeKeOfBE3s
OvTVZEZ1kYPu+hu++WWxLzKveB/tem4m9ltNFXVQBI1itVaj31D5CnJCL0hgX5NRXKb0lh7JABp
MFH8VDnKbFFJAPaQYMtDcRLdfNBUxFRXthVkJ26UWzQfN3vvcm73YGrp3njIfGK1rimOJwOuDhr
Fbf+yR8n2J99blXFhdm+Xx3c7eb6rHcVEO6GtQm2JEpPWtXeotNR8FvkvI2xdzxotdw/2eE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IESw2hB7vOvNAiXwumFEOQC3VNmQpTdzDBM+2K1ZRrM0uC2jzzTqgG1sHCw2wMXZcxKRlstkw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1a88:b0:385:f4db:e33b with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a221fb051mr47079409f8f.21.1735928093852;
Fri, 03 Jan 2025 10:14:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili.univ-paris-diderot.fr
(roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-40.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr. [194.254.61.40])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a546e822bsm15685620f8f.22.2025.01.03.10.14.53
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Fri, 03 Jan 2025 10:14:53 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH v5] rfc: Add Request-For-Comment process.
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2025 19:14:40 +0100
Message-ID: <ba6a719d836bb717d72e42688ba7592e1c19ec4c.1735927931.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.46.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?q?Ludovic=20Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-)
* rfc/0001-rfc-process.md: New file.
* rfc/0000-template.md: New file.
Co-authored-by: Noé Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
Change-Id: Ide88e70dc785ab954ccb42fb043625db12191208
---
rfc/0000-template.md | 59 +++++++++
rfc/0001-rfc-process.md | 257 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 316 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 rfc/0000-template.md
create mode 100644 rfc/0001-rfc-process.md
diff --git a/rfc/0000-template.md b/rfc/0000-template.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..a3913335ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/rfc/0000-template.md
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+title: <The meaningful name of the proposal>
+Issue: <number assigned by Debbugs>
+Status: <pending|successful|withdrawn|deprecated>
+Supporter: <Your Name>
+Co-supporter(s): <Some> <Names>
+date: <date when the process starts>
+---
+
+# Summary
+
+A one-paragraph explanation. Main sales pitch.
+
+# Motivation
+
+Describe the problem·s this RFC attempts to address as clearly as possible and
+optionally give an example. Explain how the status quo is insufficient or not
+ideal.
+
+# Detail Design
+
+Main part. The sections answers What are the tradeoffs of this proposal
+compared to status quo or potential alternatives? Explain details, corner
+cases, provide examples. Explain it so that someone familiar can understand.
+
+It is best to exemplify, contrived example too. If the Motivation section
+describes something that is hard to do without this proposal, this is a good
+place to show how easy that thing is to do with the proposal.
+
+## The Cost Of Reverting
+
+Will your proposed change cause a behaviour change? Assess the expected
+impact on existing code on the following scale:
+
+0. No breakage
+1. Breakage only in extremely rare cases (exotic or unknown cases)
+2. Breakage in rare cases (user living in cutting-edge)
+3. Breakage in common cases
+
+Explain why the benefits of the change outweigh the costs of breakage.
+Describe the migration path. Consider specifying a compatibility warning for
+one or more releases. Give examples of error that will be reported for
+previously-working cases; do they make it easy for users to understand what
+needs to change and why?
+
+How will your proposed change evolve with time? What is the cost of changing
+the approach later?
+
+The aim is to explicitely consider beforehand potential Compatibility issues.
+
+# Drawbacks or Open Questions
+
+At submitting time, be upfront and trust that the community will help.
+
+At the end of the process, this section will be empty. If not, please be
+explicit with the known issues by adding a dedicated subsection under Detail
+design.
+
+The aim here is to ease when revisiting the topic. It will help to grasp the
+essentials and invite to read all the discussion.
diff --git a/rfc/0001-rfc-process.md b/rfc/0001-rfc-process.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..adb5365d73
--- /dev/null
+++ b/rfc/0001-rfc-process.md
@@ -0,0 +1,257 @@
+title: Request-For-Comment process
+Issue: 66844
+Status: pending
+Supporter: Simon Tournier
+Co-supporters: Noé Lopez
+date: 2023-10-31
+---
+
+# Summary
+
+The “RFC” (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent
+and structured path for major changes to enter the Guix project, so that all
+stakeholders can make decisions collectively and be confident about the
+direction it is evolving in.
+
+# Motivation
+
+Guix becomes a broadly used system with many contributors and the way we add
+new features has been good but starts to show its limits. The lack of a clear
+process easy to consult makes difficult to share a common evolution.
+
+There are a number of changes that are significant enough that they could
+benefit from wider community consensus before being introduced. Either
+because they introduce new concepts, big changes or are controversial enough
+that not everybody will consent on the direction to take.
+
+Therefore, the purpose of this RFC is to introduce a process that allows to
+bring the discussion upfront and strengthen decisions. This RFC is used to
+bootstrap the process and further RFCs can be used to refine the process.
+
+It covers significant changes, where “significant” means any change that could
+only be reverted at a high cost, or any change with the potential to disrupt
+user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
+
+- changing the <package> record type and/or its interfaces;
+- adding or removing a 'guix' sub-command;
+- changing the channel mechanism;
+- changing project policy such as teams, decision-making, the
+ deprecation policy or this very document;
+- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure
+ (mailing lists, source code repository and forge, continuous
+ integration, etc.)
+
+# Detailed design
+
+## When to follow this process
+
+This process is followed when one intends to make “significant” changes to the
+Guix project. What constitutes a “significant” change may include the
+following:
+
+- Changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
+ - Command-line interfaces
+ - Core Scheme interfaces
+- Big restructuring of packages
+- Hard to revert changes
+- Governance or changes to the way we collaborate
+
+Certain changes do not require an RFC:
+
+- Adding, updating packages, removing outdated packages
+- Fixing security updates and bugs that don’t break interfaces
+
+A patch submission that contains any of the aforementioned substantial changes
+may be asked to first submit a RFC.
+
+For general day-to-day contributions, please follow the regular process as
+described by the manual, for example sections “Submitting Patches”, “Reviewing
+the Work of Others”, “Teams” and “Making Decisions”.
+
+## How the process works
+
+1. Clone <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git>
+2. Copy rfc/0000-template.md to rfc/00XY-good-name.md where good-name
+ is descriptive but not too long and XY increments
+3. Fill RFC
+4. Submit to guix-patches@HIDDEN
+5. Announce your RFC to guix-devel@HIDDEN
+
+Make sure the RFC proposal is as well-written as you would expect the final
+version of it to be. It does not mean that all the subtleties must be
+considered at this point since that is the aim of Comment period. It means
+that the RFC process is not a prospective brainstorming and the RFC proposal
+formalize an idea for making it happen.
+
+The submission of a RFC proposal does not require an implementation. However,
+to improve the chance of a successful RFC, it is recommended to have an idea
+for implementing it. If an implementation is attached to the detailed design,
+it might help the discussion.
+
+At this point, at least one other person must volunteer to be “co-supporter”.
+The aim is to improve the chances that the RFC is both desired and likely to
+be implemented. See “Co-supporter” section.
+
+Once supporter and co-supporter(s) are committed in the RFC process, the
+discussion starts. Publicizing of the RFC on the project’s mailing list named
+guix-devel is mandatory, and on other main communication channels is highly
+recommended.
+
+After a number of rounds of comments, the discussion should settle and a
+general consensus should emerge. Please follow the “Decision Making” and
+“Timeline” sections.
+
+A successful RFC is not a rubber stamp, and in particular still does not mean
+the feature will ultimately be merged; it does mean that in principle all the
+participants have agreed to the feature and are amenable to merging it.
+
+An unsuccessful RFC is **not** a judgment on the value of the work, so a
+refusal should rather be interpreted as “let's discuss again with a different
+angle”. The last state of an unsuccessful RFC is archived under the directory
+rfc/withdrawn/ and the status quo continues.
+
+When time passing, a successful RFC might be replaced by another successful
+RFC. The status of the former is thus modified and becomes 'deprecated'; it
+is archived under the directory rfc/deprecated.
+
+At the end of the process, the status of the RFC is either successful,
+withdrawn or deprecated.
+
+## Co-supporter
+
+A co-supporter is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project's
+practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a team member or
+a contributor with commit access. The co-supporter helps the supporter, they
+are both charged with keeping the RFC moving through the process. The
+co-supporter role is to help the RFC supporter by being the timekeeper and
+helps in pushing forward until process completion.
+
+The co-supporter doesn’t necessarily have to agree with all the points
+of the RFC but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions
+are a good thing for the community.
+
+## Timeline
+
+The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following recommended
+periods:
+
+digraph "RFC Timeline" {
+ submission[label=<Submission Period<br />7 days>]
+ comments[label=<Discussion Period<br />30–60 days>]
+ last_call[label=<Deliberation Period<br />14 days>]
+ withdrawn[label=Withdrawn, shape=rectangle]
+ final[label=Final, shape=rectangle]
+
+ submission -> comments
+ submission -> withdrawn
+ comments -> last_call
+ last_call -> withdrawn
+ last_call -> final
+
+ withdrawn -> submission [label="New version"]
+
+ comments -> withdrawn
+}
+
+The author may withdraw their RFC proposal at any time; and it might be
+submitted again using a new issue number.
+
+### Submission (up to 7 days)
+
+Anyone might be author and submits their RFC proposal as a regular patch and
+look for co-supporter(s). See “Co-supporter” section.
+
+Once the RFC proposal is co-supported, it marks the start of a Comment period.
+
+### Comment (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
+
+The Comment period starts once the author publishes their RFC to guix-devel,
+then the RFC is freely discussed by anyone for a period of at least 30 days.
+It is up to the supporter and co-supporter(s) to ensure that sufficient
+discussion is solicited.
+
+Please make sure that all have the time and space for expressing their
+comments. The RFC is about significant changes, thus more opinions is better
+than less.
+
+The author is encouraged to publish updated versions of their RFC at any point
+during the discussion period.
+
+Once the discussion goes stale or after 60 days, the author must summarize the
+state of the conversation and keep the final version.
+
+It moves to the last call period.
+
+### Last call (up to 14 days)
+
+Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to cast one of
+the following replies on the patch-tracking entry about the RFC:
+
+- Support: meaning that support in principle;
+- Accept: meaning no opposition in principle;
+- Disagree: meaning opposed in principle.
+
+This deliberation period strengthens the consensus; see “Decision Making”.
+
+The RFC is accepted if (1) at least 25% of the team members cast a reply, and
+(2) no one disagrees. In other cases, the RFC is withdrawn.
+
+Anyone who is on a team (see file ‘teams.scm’) is a deliberating member and is
+asked to reply.
+
+## Decision Making
+
+It is expected from all contributors, and even more so from team members, to
+help in building consensus. By using consensus, we are committed to finding
+solutions that everyone can live with.
+
+It implies that no decision is made against significant concerns and these
+concerns are actively resolved with proposals that work for everyone. A
+contributor wishing to block a proposal bears a special responsibility for
+finding alternatives, proposing ideas/code or explaining the rationale for the
+status quo.
+
+As a deliberating member, when replying “Disagree”, you mean (1) you cannot
+live with the RFC and (2) you have been active and helping in discussing the
+RFC during the Comment period.
+
+To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
+details, you are encouraged to read
+<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
+
+## Merging the outcome
+
+Once a consensus is made, a committer should do the following to merge the
+RFC:
+
+1. Fill in the remaining metadata in the RFC header, including links
+ for the original submission.
+2. Commit everything.
+3. Announce the establishment of the RFC to all.
+
+## Template of RFC
+
+The structure of the RFC is captured by the template; see the file
+rfc/0000-template.md. Please use Markdown as markup language.
+
+## The Cost Of Reverting
+
+The RFC process can be refined by further RFCs.
+
+## Drawbacks
+
+There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more than
+it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help
+contribution, not an end in itself.
+
+Of course, group decision-making processes are difficult to manage.
+
+The ease of commenting may bring a slightly diminished signal-to-noise ratio
+in collected feedback, particularly on easily bike-shedded topics.
+
+## Open questions
+
+There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process. While
+we want to ensure that changes which affect the users are well-considered, we
+certainly don’t want the process to become unduly burdensome. This is a
+careful balance which will require care to maintain moving forward.
base-commit: ce3ffac5d366ebf20e0d95779f2fe1ea6dde0202
--
2.45.2
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Dec 2024 15:26:54 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Dec 31 10:26:54 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36513 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tSe90-0001Cm-2r
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:26:54 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-f42.google.com ([209.85.128.42]:44359)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tSe8x-0001Ca-BQ
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:26:52 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-f42.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-43618283d48so73771695e9.1
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:26:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1735658751; x=1736263551; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references
:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to; bh=baBulgzTCfFNuITvWzkLJi09MmLYJ2zCk42+rt2OV/Q=;
b=mWF96SqjMm4cQC60mLQ5xrcAG9RJ6DF70i6uwNqp/KMT9pWd1CilrNso+o3g5lzmqf
MYjyeSTUd5BbX8pX0Eqolgedesp1VXdx7ggwuplK8K3eU6juc6wiOfv8FX6I4JfnF0vt
N70eAFysogTazqlhbKGWPPMtChrNrOOtHMGL31zEppGFhcBlWZ9G7kMettrRG4FhxxuG
PonWKtcvEwfXS4RdJypgxm4XiGlJbgCizW7BejT6wJuZXbgO0amf1YmNOUKzH85bW6ys
DveJ4TnwE7NwdsNQR1Ol6Fmf2/A5ZoZiU3RfL6aVrtlbgxcWfQVcm1aGcyWFKSOQjq1D
juug==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1735658751; x=1736263551;
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=baBulgzTCfFNuITvWzkLJi09MmLYJ2zCk42+rt2OV/Q=;
b=KOwvy4O2n+f1jO8PxSAMKa5ombOK1fKI1fdroBxWdCK/UpVH4JmNMgNFGFYrlcsXnL
l2kEUinl9CiMHwWiJ0KLW3NXjkoL9x5X69SQXHPDpMfjFAon9ihm4z7Yfk/91GX4U1bn
kNY5nzTRwnRmlZyZFq2jBUOouK1bbPtNMKb8ge/9nS5p4gwg0L11B/fRTFLX2Q/j3oaD
uY7aadyZTzYsuvrh5Ql7axdLsalhHg6y6Fe7NqYkJ6J8RNq6vish8BOQ4KJyaqUWecBd
w3F38jSHKp6XJqVjtG6xqJoI7avPppJJZqkMcnWIAzMR38vxV/rrvvdUbDgMycvBGIMv
3P0A==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCWH8mtoq8ZVZaGc+938XegdPElBQNqkQZbE0uswyZI1RIGqx0FaLMMWklTu7zu0HnCnApq9og==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwRpaoPqh5NoWr6DurC06os2g8ezwMd7k/j3n3P/e8Ej4P+g+9a
3Z+XrL4vjDHoVN5oFFPtai0zcWHQYbC/HhFLFKtTKYsFKVUvHHyLVcIc8A==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncs6gZC1as4LDka8BegYrP8LYQrpf/7U0/sdUAspPHiMunyB3wdWfBdE1M6Vxsf
fP0IrcGZmOMl2wHB3PQTExvg/T0HxImr+jPZxPAleUq8lQdXNPtei/DDsHe+NaQGc5WEoAoY4H6
eQlkJClQTXcHoQv1ShSvrjDl0xyma7ZnYT4iItIcFXNdT7i9kejsRLfO/AhKJIhTN4VslkvqMIM
zMNrqKjz6htAg0C2jQoK3Cissqoj6WRAwLPdbhVDuNykujktLX7Ix2FHlzCC7kVpjy5J3TSecRB
SO/UYl5nnyLlp9TwcApGx3XLGrS6rXLeZKdrtmFDJA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEKh6FweUzFBhzQEx0Hvs2Pnh2ksBe0V6jGQnxSC5AnZ85ghI0FlxiUFWdIknzsKeNx+jpy5Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1d03:b0:434:a529:3b87 with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4366864313dmr415490355e9.10.1735658748782;
Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:25:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (roam-nat-fw-prg-194-254-61-41.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr.
[194.254.61.41]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-4366127c508sm391234405e9.33.2024.12.31.07.25.47
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:25:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87ttaqwun1.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <877c7qe243.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
<87ttaqwun1.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 16:23:53 +0100
Message-ID: <87ldvvzxiu.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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
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 Thu, 26 Dec 2024 at 12:28, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote:
>> In other words, the numbers are not for being summed, the aim is to
>> capture:
>>
>> - Support
>> - I can with with it
>> - I cannot live with it
>>
>> BTW, I do not like the word =E2=80=9CReject=E2=80=9D and I prefer =E2=80=
=9CDisagree=E2=80=9D or even
>> better =E2=80=9CI cannot live with it=E2=80=9D.
>
> I like the spirit of it, and I would propose exactly that if people were
> to meet physically at a meeting.
>
> The problem I see here is that we=E2=80=99re online, all communication is
> asynchronous, sometimes concise, sometimes verbose, sometimes frequent,
> sometimes rare, participants may be friends or strangers, and yet we
> need to come to a clear shared understanding of whether the RFC is
> =E2=80=9Caccepted=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Cwithdrawn=E2=80=9D.
>
> If we keep it too fuzzy, I fear we might be unable to decide what to do.
>
>>> I think we should now make sure we reach consensus on the timeline, and
>>> in particular:
>>>
>>> 1. on the voting process;
>>
>> Maybe I misunderstand something. From my point, we do not =E2=80=9Cvote=
=E2=80=9D
>> because we are trying to work using consensus. When I proposed +1/0/-1
>> my aim was not to =E2=80=9Cvote=E2=80=9C but to be sure that the proposa=
l is not
>> overlooked.
>
> I=E2=80=99m all for consensus-based decision making, as you know. My con=
cern is
> making sure a clear and unambiguous decision is made at the end of the
> RFC period.
>
> The risk I see is that of the final withdrawn/accepted decision to be
> perceived as an arbitrary choice by the people in power (RFC editors,
> long-timers, etc.), or that of being unable to make that final decision.
> It=E2=80=99s a risk that perhaps exists only in the most contentious case=
s, but
> if we can use vote as a tool to avoid it, it=E2=80=99s worth considering.
As you wrote in [1], I think we have the same concern but we have a
different idea behind the same =E2=80=9Cvoting=E2=80=9D word. Instead I ag=
ree, it=E2=80=99s a
deliberation period to be sure that the consensus reaches the quorum
(e.g., 25% of the all team members).
Somehow, +1/0/-1 seems another way to express the exact same idea for
the approval statuses (e.g., see Wayland [2]):
+ ACK, or =E2=80=9Cacknowledged=E2=80=9D,
meaning that the member supports in principle
+ NOPP, or =E2=80=9Cno opposition=E2=80=9D,
meaning that the member is not opposed in principle
+ NACK, or =E2=80=9Cnegative acknowledgement=E2=80=9D
meaning that the member is opposed in principle.
which reads:
- Support +1 ACK Awesome!
- I can with with it 0 NOPP LGTM
- I cannot live with it -1 NACK WDYT about=E2=80=A6
The last column is how we are collaborating over all the mailing lists
since years.=20
Again, if someone wants to =E2=80=9Cblock=E2=80=9C the RFC, then the blocke=
r must be
active in proposing an alternative and/or explain with details why the
status quo is preferable.
In the other words, I disagree to add numbers: how many =E2=80=99Support=E2=
=80=99 against
=E2=80=98I cannot live with it=E2=80=99? 1 =E2=80=99Support=E2=80=99 vs 2 =
=E2=80=99I cannot live with it=E2=80=99? Why
not 1 vs 3? Or more? Or less?
However, I agree that consensus might scale poorly and might outcome
some blocked situations. That=E2=80=99s why =E2=80=98Decision making: cons=
ensus=E2=80=99 must
be included in the process itself and carefully worded. :-) For these
potential blocked situations, the last word is about maintainers.
Well, a =E2=80=9Cpositive consensus is reached=E2=80=9D if after the =E2=80=
=9CDeliberation
Period=E2=80=9C, we have 25% of all the members of all the teams expressing
either =E2=80=99Support=E2=80=99 or either =E2=80=99I can live with it=E2=
=80=99. If after this period,
we have only one =E2=80=99I cannot live with it=E2=80=99, then the RFC is =
=E2=80=99dismissed=E2=80=99.
Please note that =E2=80=99I cannot live with it=E2=80=99 implies an active =
friendly
discussion before the end of the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D. In=
other words,
I cannot sleep and the day before the =E2=80=9CDeliberation Period=E2=80=9D=
just raise:
Hey, no =E2=80=99I cannot live with it=E2=80=99.
WDYT?
Well, I will try to clarify the proposal in the coming days in order to
remove the =E2=80=9Ctoo fuzzy=E2=80=9D (being active, being blocker, etc.)
Cheers,
simon
1: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN>
Mon, 30 Dec 2024 12:03:29 +0100
id:87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN
https://yhetil.org/guix/87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN
2:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/external/anongit.freedesktop.org/git/wayl=
and/wayland-protocols/+/HEAD/GOVERNANCE.md
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Dec 2024 11:59:43 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Dec 30 06:59:43 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57584 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tSEQw-0005GY-Um for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 06:59:43 -0500 Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([194.63.252.55]:51839) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tSEQu-0005GD-1x for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 06:59:41 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:From: Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=NHYyIjUz2vwbmWEFMk/uz7AtcSIMxXZ4TdwTA6f86LQ=; b=t bObf5bWv0mvOVjXzQPx+P839HqbLxae4vanq3GHyoKcEZc738Cvr7rIzYE1Tjt1TW7QM/94vxgYT4 N/oHOzsOA7UpGmhqs7tiQxStb6hqYUH3tlSdoxNu0x1Pbmv6Y598toJZHMXHwE6j2bIWWpihQ4DEN nevRzYT6b0VCRR6OQf9LK013BM8GF79KRS1lHzHPPjByfQqvtv9x/5e2vbGOu6f8f9p+wQp/zFz3+ HhTooq+YygS2nSkkyUJg1sIQkF3kohqR0OpIblfw9BDPfYy1+xig8hPeYu57bTNwvJaYWgKe7JUrL 67SQv2Btztcqb+mKQ1HO7yOb4Jk1LakIA==; Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1tSEOi-008oes-1C; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 12:57:24 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 12:58:46 +0100 Message-ID: <875xn14c21.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-) Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes: > OK. As I wrote in my reply to Simon, my thought here was that =E2=80=9Cv= oting=E2=80=9D* > would give a clear and unambiguous way, not subject to interpretation, > to decide whether the RFC is withdrawn: it=E2=80=99s easier to add number= s than > to determine whether =E2=80=9Ca positive consensus is reached=E2=80=9D (c= urrent > wording). > This is why an ACK/NACK system works great in my opinion: you send =E2=80= =9CACK=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9CNACK=E2=80=9D litteraly so your opinion is clear. And you can = just count the number of each, without implying a vote. > But I don=E2=80=99t know, I guess that=E2=80=99s an =E2=80=9CI will live = with it=E2=80=9D from me on > this one. :-) > > Two other issue I raised was the quorum: Simon proposed half of the > committers; I propose 25% of team members. Thoughts? > I don=E2=80=99t have the experience to judge, but I would just do =E2=80=9C= as long as no one is against it its good=E2=80=9D. The reason is that I=E2=80=99m afraid that people might just not participate because they are fine with an RFC or don=E2=80=99t care, and so it would ju= st get stuck there. If you look at this RFC, we are four participants, how many will we get after the finalization? Half of the committers is 25 people (based on .guix-authorizations), and a quarter of the team members is 10. Personnally, I have trouble imagining that this amount of people will come to send a mail to the RFC. > * Maybe =E2=80=9Cvoting=E2=80=9D is misleading; =E2=80=9Cdeliberation=E2= =80=9D might be clearer. > >>> 2. on the submission -> withdrawn transition, in case nobody supports >>> the RFC. > > [...] > >> I agree with that timeline, but I would have just =E2=80=9Cforgotten=E2= =80=9D an RFC >> that doesn=E2=80=99t pass the submission period, since that would mean i= t is not >> good enough to be discussed. It can just be kept in the mail archives >> like any other unfinished idea. >> >> A withdrawn RFC would mean keeping it in the rfc/withdrawn directory. > > Oh right, forgotten/dismissed seems more appropriate than withdrawn > here. > > Anyway, I think we should aim for finalization of v1 of the RFC process > by, say, Jan. 15th. I will dedicate some time to tweak the wording, and > then we can call it a thing. > Good idea! I=E2=80=99ll be waiting for your v5 then. And then I can bring back the RFC template. > (A bit sad that it=E2=80=99s just the three of us talking, we wouldn=E2= =80=99t have the > quorum here=E2=80=A6) > Agreed. Lastly, do we want to move the RFCs to a separate git repository? Have a nice day, No=C3=A9
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Dec 2024 11:05:53 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Dec 30 06:05:53 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57498 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tSDar-0002fB-Cy for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 06:05:53 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44986) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tSDao-0002ew-FF for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 06:05:51 -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 1tSDYa-00039a-Tl; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 06:03:32 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=x1n8Kv3ge4siolZRWMsryeW8fnhWn/pv5k1r0OHvlfI=; b=FzGjsAk0NTI4GCUUZklQ N8eudAi8onh0HtTuzEDMxvaIJ26YzfYm7oFUCn7MvzX3M/JGtymZ4t/xg31o7sfjy/mYqAmESC4Tv ZzaQyh+ydYWA9A5SKxw36mpjLvJ4VZq9YQ2LvacSBuuijtY+psCLhPJ8I7vwSe9Qw2GLPISQdiEoR JlkIBqNekMIQNCrBvy2gGT0TxglVliQEVfu3VnzOgyEo68+Xf5sG2JahGHv452Lj+CkHIKkTjsBHC tfW2XuMHpQBWDVWNs8BBed1422HaN2L6Rbdky4GkT/9i9W7NxQOSR6/Qb3loIhQg5BxfSakPbS5lE k1SaUl1XTsd2pQ==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> (=?utf-8?Q?=22No=C3=A9?= Lopez"'s message of "Sun, 29 Dec 2024 19:31:46 +0100") References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 12:03:29 +0100 Message-ID: <87seq5tou6.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 No=C3=A9, No=C3=A9 Lopez <noe@no=C3=A9.eu> skribis: >> It seems unchanged compared to v3. WDYT of my comments, suggestions, .> and proposed wording: >> >> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736#9 >> >> ? > > As Simon said, I think a vote goes against the principle of > consensus. OK. As I wrote in my reply to Simon, my thought here was that =E2=80=9Cvot= ing=E2=80=9D* would give a clear and unambiguous way, not subject to interpretation, to decide whether the RFC is withdrawn: it=E2=80=99s easier to add numbers = than to determine whether =E2=80=9Ca positive consensus is reached=E2=80=9D (cur= rent wording). But I don=E2=80=99t know, I guess that=E2=80=99s an =E2=80=9CI will live wi= th it=E2=80=9D from me on this one. :-) Two other issue I raised was the quorum: Simon proposed half of the committers; I propose 25% of team members. Thoughts? * Maybe =E2=80=9Cvoting=E2=80=9D is misleading; =E2=80=9Cdeliberation=E2=80= =9D might be clearer. >> 2. on the submission -> withdrawn transition, in case nobody supports >> the RFC. [...] > I agree with that timeline, but I would have just =E2=80=9Cforgotten=E2= =80=9D an RFC > that doesn=E2=80=99t pass the submission period, since that would mean it= is not > good enough to be discussed. It can just be kept in the mail archives > like any other unfinished idea. > > A withdrawn RFC would mean keeping it in the rfc/withdrawn directory. Oh right, forgotten/dismissed seems more appropriate than withdrawn here. Anyway, I think we should aim for finalization of v1 of the RFC process by, say, Jan. 15th. I will dedicate some time to tweak the wording, and then we can call it a thing. (A bit sad that it=E2=80=99s just the three of us talking, we wouldn=E2=80= =99t have the quorum here=E2=80=A6) Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Dec 2024 18:30:32 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Dec 29 13:30:31 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56131 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tRy3b-0006Qu-Cf
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 29 Dec 2024 13:30:31 -0500
Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([194.63.252.55]:49959)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tRy3Y-0006Qg-3g
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 29 Dec 2024 13:30:30 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:
MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:From:
Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:
Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:
References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:
List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=5vo9nVgq1YDbi7llUNXQriMbJ9eboLD1sKzACU86lsU=; b=b
3v75584Zwtgn1ypOFPGgYxnrfW1933euXNvVwG/tQD3NZ9tbnHlvnKHNEqNU+7CPhefdF0xchdC1e
3f8EiXEq5cviokgxmGjl4nPZbYJceKcxtg++6n9kWkGYuXSVUOdOgL6dBuL0tuKz3i+i0xxB10ne/
IPBBRsIJgR6Jmop1E6pEn3iKkJgzx04KYxgGVOvg4GdR2aOhdmehc4podjuahbRDU2Ahbjgd763ho
BAZJYe1phNWakr3URaaSPppLB6HKaZbisSnyCTCZEZAQfsmkRM4hsuHC+oMoJPKe8E58ifWW8DpDi
PjAQ/cU4pJtZgOB/UN56js63VOJuafn8g==;
Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95)
id 1tRy3R-005sQq-Lo; Sun, 29 Dec 2024 19:30:21 +0100
From: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2024 19:31:46 +0100
Message-ID: <87wmfifii5.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-)
Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> writes:
> Hi No=C3=A9,
>
> Thanks for this new version.
>
> No=C3=A9 Lopez <noe@no=C3=A9.eu> skribis:
>
>> +### Submission (up to 7 days)
>> +
>> +The author submits their RFC proposal as a regular patch and look for
>> +co-supporter(s). See =E2=80=9CCo-supporter=E2=80=9D section.
>> +
>> +Once the RFC is co-supported, it marks the start of a discussion period.
>
> [...]
>
>> +### Last call (up to 14 days)
>> +
>> +The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a last grace period
>> +of 14 days is granted. People are asked to agree or disagree by
>> +commenting:
>> +
>> +- +1 / LGTM: I support
>> +- =3D0 / LGTM: I will live with it
>> +- -1: I disagree with this proposal
>> +
>> +At least half of people with commit access must express their voice with
>> +the keys above during this last call. We need to be sure that the RFC
>> +had been read by people committed to take care of the project, since it
>> +proposes an important change.
>> +
>> +When a positive consensus is reached, the RFC becomes effective. If not,
>> +the proposal is archived and the status quo continues.
>
> It seems unchanged compared to v3. WDYT of my comments, suggestions,
> and proposed wording:
>
> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736#9
>
> ?
As Simon said, I think a vote goes against the principle of
consensus. Maybe we can take inspiration from the wayland protocol?
If a stakeholder thinks the RFC is complete and satisfactory, they ACK
it. If the RFC needs changes, they simply comment and if they are
against it they NACK it.
Quoting Mike Blumenkrantz:
>A NACK for an experimental protocol carries some variation on the followin=
g meanings:
>This idea is broken and cannot work.
>OR
>This approach is fundamentally against the core principles or spirit of Wa=
yland.
>A NACK must be well-justified, as determined by members of the
>governance team, who are assumed to be acting in good faith for the best i=
nterests of the project.
In this way, we can say that an RFC needs a specific amount of ACKs and
no NACKs to be merged, ensuring everybody is at least fine with it and
the stakeholders are interested enough to ACK it.
>
> I think we should now make sure we reach consensus on the timeline, and
> in particular:
>
> 1. on the voting process;
>
> 2. on the submission -> withdrawn transition, in case nobody supports
> the RFC.
>
> Once we have that, we can fine-tune the language and hopefully be done
> within a couple of weeks.
>
> I like the Dot graph you submitted! Here=E2=80=99s an updated version, w=
ith a
> new submission -> withdrawn arrow (as proposed in the comment above) and
> with hopefully clearer names (in particular =E2=80=9CVoting Period=E2=80=
=9D rather than
> =E2=80=9CLast call=E2=80=9D):
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> digraph "RFC Timeline" {
> submission[label=3D<Submission Period<br />7=C2=A0days>]
> comments[label=3D<Discussion Period<br />30=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>]
> last_call[label=3D<Voting Period<br />14=C2=A0days>]
> withdrawn[label=3DWithdrawn, shape=3Drectangle]
> final[label=3DFinal, shape=3Drectangle]
>=20=20=20=20=20
> submission -> comments
> submission -> withdrawn
> comments -> last_call
> last_call -> withdrawn
> last_call -> final
>=20=20=20=20=20
> withdrawn -> submission [label=3D"New version"]
>=20=20=20=20=20
> comments -> withdrawn
> }
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> Thoughts?
I agree with that timeline, but I would have just =E2=80=9Cforgotten=E2=80=
=9D an RFC
that doesn=E2=80=99t pass the submission period, since that would mean it i=
s not
good enough to be discussed. It can just be kept in the mail archives
like any other unfinished idea.
A withdrawn RFC would mean keeping it in the rfc/withdrawn directory.
This was also why I had proposed the idea of keeping a set of available
co-supporters, since any well written RFC should be able to get past the
submission period even if you can=E2=80=99t find someone to co-support.
Good evening,
No=C3=A9
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Dec 2024 11:28:46 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 26 06:28:46 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40285 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tQm2n-0000Tg-NB for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Dec 2024 06:28:46 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51740) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tQm2l-0000TS-IL for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Dec 2024 06:28:44 -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 1tQm2f-0004jP-Mn; Thu, 26 Dec 2024 06:28:37 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=6eQfLkNBgiXAE0qky7Udoz1j3MIHuPTchz5Gt3dOa8s=; b=K4lEnfCy+vJrADLyKA8+ 9+cKvpJpC/U8Bq+ScYatrJp+RMl+akrQlYcFZ4Kyb0u4eyhudMWmEiKGMmn9H382fbws9yEAM/m+b Tb7dLo2aQHDalCugDBHJ25fNCBiYaHjXujZgeEL99CcEsFfLEDWPKCWjtn3qHveUrk4PIs3ZzE3RD /TCh3LdFOGfYY9QgtRGiowXIpq/KXdmx1S6hbZ8XxU77euu62jIQtrkqZclEgMp+poLsW6GI841kA laiLB0dcJwN65ReTW1ArPya01dpORE9O1+ANteOc+lincC9c9qsZKkURFZGLc7r9aHoifnQwIU/nC MOzvAKy+RxsIzQ==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <877c7qe243.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Mon, 23 Dec 2024 18:33:00 +0100") References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <877c7qe243.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Sextidi 6 =?utf-8?Q?Niv=C3=B4se?= an 233 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour de la Lave 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: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 12:28:34 +0100 Message-ID: <87ttaqwun1.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org 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, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> skribis: >>> +### Last call (up to 14 days) >>> + >>> +The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a last grace period >>> +of 14 days is granted. People are asked to agree or disagree by >>> +commenting: >>> + >>> +- +1 / LGTM: I support >>> +- =3D0 / LGTM: I will live with it >>> +- -1: I disagree with this proposal >>> + >>> +At least half of people with commit access must express their voice wi= th >>> +the keys above during this last call. We need to be sure that the RFC >>> +had been read by people committed to take care of the project, since it >>> +proposes an important change. >>> + >>> +When a positive consensus is reached, the RFC becomes effective. If no= t, >>> +the proposal is archived and the status quo continues. >> >> It seems unchanged compared to v3. WDYT of my comments, suggestions, >> and proposed wording: >> >> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736#9 >> >> ? > > Quoting: > > > I think committers here are mentioned as a simple way to express > > membership and avoid infiltration, but it has the downside of i= gnoring > > many members and giving committers a special privilege. > > It=E2=80=99s not about infiltration, it=E2=80=99s about to be sure that p= eople agree and > do not overlook. Right. (Though I think infiltration is also a valid concern.) > > I propose this definition: anyone who is on a team (in =E2=80= =98teams.scm=E2=80=99) is a > > voting member*. > > I agree. > > > We can keep a quorum, but I think 50% of the voters is too ambi= tious; > > maybe 25%? > > Well, I picked 50% almost randomly. ;-) Somehow, I do not have a strong > opinion. My concern is only to be sure that we have a consensus and not > something falling between the cracks. Yes, agreed. > > This would become=C2=B9: > > > > Once the final version is published, team members have 14 day= s to cast > > one of the following votes about the RFC: > > > > - Support (+1); > > - Accept (0); > > - Reject (-2). > > > > Votes are cast by replying on the patch-tracking entry of the= RFC. > > > > The RFC is accepted if (1) at least 25% of the voting members= cast a > > vote, and (2) the sum of votes is non-negative. In other cas= es, the > > RFC is withdrawn. > > For me, if we have only one minus, it means we do not have consensus. > Therefore, the person who cannot live with the proposal must be > proactive in finding a solution that we all agree on. Yes. > In other words, the numbers are not for being summed, the aim is to > capture: > > - Support > - I can with with it > - I cannot live with it > > BTW, I do not like the word =E2=80=9CReject=E2=80=9D and I prefer =E2=80= =9CDisagree=E2=80=9D or even > better =E2=80=9CI cannot live with it=E2=80=9D. I like the spirit of it, and I would propose exactly that if people were to meet physically at a meeting. The problem I see here is that we=E2=80=99re online, all communication is asynchronous, sometimes concise, sometimes verbose, sometimes frequent, sometimes rare, participants may be friends or strangers, and yet we need to come to a clear shared understanding of whether the RFC is =E2=80=9Caccepted=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Cwithdrawn=E2=80=9D. If we keep it too fuzzy, I fear we might be unable to decide what to do. >> I think we should now make sure we reach consensus on the timeline, and >> in particular: >> >> 1. on the voting process; > > Maybe I misunderstand something. From my point, we do not =E2=80=9Cvote= =E2=80=9D > because we are trying to work using consensus. When I proposed +1/0/-1 > my aim was not to =E2=80=9Cvote=E2=80=9C but to be sure that the proposal= is not > overlooked. I=E2=80=99m all for consensus-based decision making, as you know. My conce= rn is making sure a clear and unambiguous decision is made at the end of the RFC period. The risk I see is that of the final withdrawn/accepted decision to be perceived as an arbitrary choice by the people in power (RFC editors, long-timers, etc.), or that of being unable to make that final decision. It=E2=80=99s a risk that perhaps exists only in the most contentious cases,= but if we can use vote as a tool to avoid it, it=E2=80=99s worth considering. WDYT? Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Dec 2024 11:15:56 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 26 06:15:56 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40268 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tQlqN-0008PZ-Q8 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Dec 2024 06:15:56 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47462) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tQlqL-0008PL-OU for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Dec 2024 06:15:54 -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 1tQlqE-0002QU-Bl; Thu, 26 Dec 2024 06:15:46 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=+d8CblfTJ3oj7bYn+jRuoAl8AGOXr1dALEe6lTS8IaY=; b=o7YU6a5WaRqSiHthHaN+ 1yy0wsWNWRHnxen3CmegxCEPI0oydUReGGH/TFTD+p5U87aLr3VqG+mkilUIvQ116lnRbtrUrHvGC 8kKu4xi7HmNze8BCfzXn0Qct45vgX0UPqMEMknAiV4RC/H6J1Zc2TC5x3ZjG67gfOQVCHuQu4+t3m aFfSQMN5kmZ7LuotIE+JTdZCQBp8eixBuSfi6h2Qj9+M+lhKlqDeLlVcaXlfqTLtUfk5Isybfa18L wMGMHENsXBrJwnOVaI5FuVZ04oFyYUI/bx2Uq/5MX86LjB3o5PNwTOttWXwqTGZZIBsmdfksiItOW jLRg6+SqznTTXg==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <8734iee0y1.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Mon, 23 Dec 2024 18:58:14 +0100") References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <09ff9f31af0575ba5223bf713f166101e79b8d99.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <875xno7oqg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87ed2cn0oq.fsf@HIDDEN> <87v7vmo9yg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <8734iee0y1.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: Sextidi 6 =?utf-8?Q?Niv=C3=B4se?= an 233 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution=2C?= jour de la Lave 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: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 12:15:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87frmay9sw.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, Steve George <steve@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, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> skribis: >> Since (1) day-to-day contributions do not follow the RFC process and (2) >> teams and consensus-based decision making are already defined (and went >> through peer review), I think it makes more sense to build on these two >> sections we already have. > > I still think the RFC process must contain its own =E2=80=9CDecision Maki= ng=E2=80=9D > process and must not refer to external parts that could be changed > without going via this RFC process. > > Somehow, from my point of view, it makes more sense to encode =E2=80=9CDe= cision > Making=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9CCommit Access=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9CTeams=E2= =80=9D via future RFCs than via sections > in the manual. And we need to bootstrap the =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2= =80=9D, no? I agree that sections in the manual are suboptimal. That is why I proposed moving contributing.texi to a document of its own, which would sit next to the RFC process document. I don=E2=80=99t consider it a prerequisite though. > For sure, I agree that we do not build from nothing. To me, this very > first RFC makes explicit the structure we already have. Maybe I > misunderstand something, IMHO, we should avoid the temptation to say: > Hey we already have a way to collaborate thus let implicitly rely on. > > Hum? =F0=9F=A4=94 Somehow, I would find the RFC process incomplete withou= t an > explicit self-contained =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D section. What I=E2=80=99d like to stress is that decision making also happens outsid= e the RFC process; not everything will go through the RFC process. So we=E2=80= =99ll need to have that manual section for day-to-day contributions anyway. But yeah, maybe we can have one specific to the RFC document, too. Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Dec 2024 17:59:40 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Dec 23 12:59:40 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56047 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tPmiR-0001pd-HO
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 12:59:40 -0500
Received: from mail-wr1-f50.google.com ([209.85.221.50]:48579)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tPmiF-0001p7-Aq
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 12:59:34 -0500
Received: by mail-wr1-f50.google.com with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38789e5b6a7so2420390f8f.1
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:59:27 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1734976706; x=1735581506; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date
:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=FtzvHsho1SH/DyvIKbgyngzAvnWJRa+hx5HXOMqonAY=;
b=OiOjWnbPDwDDUn0Pw/ZbYH0YcSUwuIQq8tfbChG1MrSUXa7C6PrKxyywHQ/giycPuz
NqZ+i3rn7LpwDcTlzBpRBytB9Pmw72NcRIM5OAmhAxyIXR9XPvfdr4WHaS8yPHoJPK+0
FTcCFqo9tjbEnFx7RB7czYh8ROWKfx8goQur2/lz55S5JYeUjsh+UqfmpWT7qK0K44rS
Jt1saqxfq+YJJ/cl09P3RyPDW1HlxR3NBpcMC4AOOhFckEpcciAHiksQR0yFrZG8+9n4
Cq+av9uNlfhr+mfJj90BZTJjaHm5oL9cDxZ6EN6VqvYQh5j60uPlvGQhw+9/MKhrVnbh
UZog==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1734976706; x=1735581506;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent: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=FtzvHsho1SH/DyvIKbgyngzAvnWJRa+hx5HXOMqonAY=;
b=dpjKbxOJI9ODZgekYpOYD+9YvR9eqkk5ZbXlhcgSwzxdVQ+rhn5MaDpd1Tx4palk5a
mdXMTiaxgsr+pRp4K+xPTVZfSDTnyJ4dunmXNdHRFw2b7b+7+xv/hqkgFoTjYIBV04nG
fMJlRnnrvOHScUSqGSidJ1eb/3fh7hnnXgR5e6iMyDhgPQbukluYjhQoue98eV+1TcZk
JYNGzwFqTNL8WGd7Ra+7+BLAO22lYUo8HKFabXqorcozMsIO08sJ6+XNVrtcC2yFrKK1
AiqwIA8IG3Z16+UMW0Ev9/o6Zbpnmb4lPAfx1gWn6W3Mvg+KacqmdcD3Ny5sPBonAcqD
20Cg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCVRDLwA0xG0nMYJ9VFIH+X7eufQaYuiS2eCQe6zADNGYyGs/IBVLABsAbKMvj/h4GPolHcHnA==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YypOnfWBIO3yt6oPVUFgd517np8h1GkBBU83xlaSorcdibfw3Rm
E44nyH6GXfkQsB6nrv2NMOrcNwCWVdyt857trkWKsliY3ypjP0yZ
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncs1ANR28a35Du7XVxhQHVpkW3CE9aywmk5XLLij1z+xrVi5xsD56+lnLx8DI/+
X80R9LjgslQKn8cOCkBWGJ/FGS0yLVZKxgdgYgxileDFWf8rEYvo2AtD/oOsJ3/4Rsb+46fMooH
Hej+nJ0wdxbohAGtYdBYOodZFN3A3lOOds5nrkkLq1HbFJDyd56Gnf3RReoYU6giLgImtFckNXF
XdXx8eKXbIQfn9p7NL1FHf+QQVV6A4XaNY/KL4+COxyRvpCTjDiUvTfEjh2bCtCiY3XKVcMZFCZ
kiHBLwvZGybnUjstAPTE3t4BPsiJJIhMQNvI6yj4KQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF1KDPMCFAEF41v6TDuZN169yj4dTPiLoRCu6xuheo80jKacPNWqBsim4aqvMuwIiI7WoZZFQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:64a4:0:b0:385:e055:a28d with SMTP id
ffacd0b85a97d-38a223fd5e6mr10071065f8f.57.1734976706115;
Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:58:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (2a02-8429-6820-f501-f792-61e9-15bb-8b9e.rev.sfr.net.
[2a02:8429:6820:f501:f792:61e9:15bb:8b9e])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-43656b3b214sm179651565e9.28.2024.12.23.09.58.24
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:58:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87v7vmo9yg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=
=?utf-8?Q?=22's?= message of "Sat, 14 Dec 2024 11:06:15 +0100")
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<09ff9f31af0575ba5223bf713f166101e79b8d99.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<875xno7oqg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87ed2cn0oq.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87v7vmo9yg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 18:58:14 +0100
Message-ID: <8734iee0y1.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, Steve George <steve@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,
I agree (more than less) with all the other comments except this
one. :-)
>>>> +** Decision making: consensus
>>>
>>> =E2=80=A6 and drop this.
>>
>> I think it makes more sense to have the Decision Making as RFC and then
>> the manual refers to it, and not the converse. ;-)
>>
>> Therefore, I would keep the section here. And once we are done, letting
>> the manual as-is, I would link to RFC.
>>
>> What defines the Decision Making *is* RFC and not the manual. ;-)
>
> Earlier, I wrote:
>
>> I would add =E2=80=9CGeneral day-to-day contributions follow the regular
>> [decision-making process] and [team organization].=E2=80=9D, with refere=
nces to
>> the relevant sections of the manual.
>
> Since (1) day-to-day contributions do not follow the RFC process and (2)
> teams and consensus-based decision making are already defined (and went
> through peer review), I think it makes more sense to build on these two
> sections we already have.
I still think the RFC process must contain its own =E2=80=9CDecision Making=
=E2=80=9D
process and must not refer to external parts that could be changed
without going via this RFC process.
Somehow, from my point of view, it makes more sense to encode =E2=80=9CDeci=
sion
Making=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9CCommit Access=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9CTeams=E2=80=
=9D via future RFCs than via sections
in the manual. And we need to bootstrap the =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=
=9D, no?
For sure, I agree that we do not build from nothing. To me, this very
first RFC makes explicit the structure we already have. Maybe I
misunderstand something, IMHO, we should avoid the temptation to say:
Hey we already have a way to collaborate thus let implicitly rely on.
Hum? =F0=9F=A4=94 Somehow, I would find the RFC process incomplete without =
an
explicit self-contained =E2=80=9CDecision Making=E2=80=9D section.
What do you think? What do people think?
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Dec 2024 17:59:39 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Dec 23 12:59:39 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56045 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tPmiQ-0001pW-Au
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 12:59:39 -0500
Received: from mail-wm1-f42.google.com ([209.85.128.42]:49196)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tPmiH-0001p3-7L
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 12:59:34 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-f42.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-43623f0c574so30432665e9.2
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:59:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1734976703; x=1735581503; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date
:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=E/5cGx9wrEcIA72C1r8hiD3QH3o7+Svi5mRfuq9dJmU=;
b=S7rDgH62JmXoMY+HxgxNTJppLCiIWzN2n1CSu9kPJ1wTxIeSOepYTWGXz6SPcX6W6p
M9VP2dkA0jT3/BQKFsCgrMeoiKtN4FOE4/lhXWC/mFsP7HEp+qXC0XU6+N4lFe1C8HcY
EieN/lPd+FVBM3zHtx97J2sCqqtk9sVPhCYHucFIxYZZ6YcXuqKmNIlbsAPLfAh6UDJi
N/uLJdgLtj+cmT8xe/B0/sL6O3ZR7/hvXUH2JNMXnTUn4Jb4SOpdk1jzVR1Mq2g7Z/EY
g7F2YwDnS2Vh9drCV/aYIFZCph2v8D0iDj/lypfPL3RdZYcAfi1T2rxu3Q/ynmfjPZab
Nc4A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1734976703; x=1735581503;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent: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=E/5cGx9wrEcIA72C1r8hiD3QH3o7+Svi5mRfuq9dJmU=;
b=FXn5l3nDDUCf/XUjlOpGlMhrNviIR1OQmVclKLO3x5XwcRpU5AUFpx0nhAF+n/+ZJ4
NgKHZOKqmCXGmtCcFNEm/CnOqdcI+k1jmGwl2BLjYOyCTQhCMZ9ApnROeRPK/gpcwiAe
fPphUN9drvttcwyyZaZyT2MV0pzfdRfksH8Do+ZOzvsOJc2Op/PrvwSlvoAWolS4zVmL
9BiRhMNpv6RJVKc+wXMsDqUXTwRnLOEgsOtV5ZKQ+WJxg8OZrrrqRtaw9v/Ago5EpGHc
AVHFE6G8sx2arKR2J8Vnioq6pvVE4WYsZEXtdsvBg9SKBTxmlSU+/AfQHWPPdX3fpi5Y
L3kA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCWFdYuwmwFR4f30mY/yl0Cu3Q5bP4WGdJzkQgKqLb0Cuyq5cBG+tCv//CQV+Toj9NT2juPNbA==@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxfJ/QYfdppJEvZFAvSrIgewRhFgOoKCJlLkUWcQCWzhanAqiFi
wt/rykscN8y7LkDCBsP+1IX55U00m4WIAdG4esV3arpxbk8sCcjXQx8PGg==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvqx8zHIB8QcwN9l9qANXqD/XFdX1w+iHnksIveuPmXQJrjYd3izsYEmH0duW1
72RMOAefWumptjk0FQVQwK3v0zmrpTUaS8wkQwh348EBnj8iQG1HA2fTN3GBxcdGJCbvSZr9w0Z
O+W58ZTcYlafl5mFgzrl7R92ukINfnyx280b43vg0jQDaW+pveIhDej1hA9eNU26kboxZGq0Y1W
cTqwB/yc0U0adsZ/LS/gp3gveb+WCsIPtN0G0RGkUz8rtBhf1TjVdghJNuuKeOzVy/krtE+hR51
1IYTYgQ2HZF3kgyBSE+SIwJLNyNggUW1fcegAQkA9Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHoGbhgi2BN+UnL9/rIo6f3/NcMifY9aRhD3HINO2SmsQpMo/DLnIVv2K/zr/WrUeiZGi3ijg==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:45cd:b0:434:a7b6:10e9 with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-436686462f9mr124207735e9.17.1734976703141;
Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:58:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lili (2a02-8429-6820-f501-f792-61e9-15bb-8b9e.rev.sfr.net.
[2a02:8429:6820:f501:f792:61e9:15bb:8b9e])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-43656af6c4esm177104275e9.4.2024.12.23.09.58.20
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:58:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=
=?utf-8?Q?=22's?= message of "Mon, 23 Dec 2024 15:42:24 +0100")
References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 18:33:00 +0100
Message-ID: <877c7qe243.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
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 Mon, 23 Dec 2024 at 15:42, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote:
>> +### Last call (up to 14 days)
>> +
>> +The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a last grace period
>> +of 14 days is granted. People are asked to agree or disagree by
>> +commenting:
>> +
>> +- +1 / LGTM: I support
>> +- =3D0 / LGTM: I will live with it
>> +- -1: I disagree with this proposal
>> +
>> +At least half of people with commit access must express their voice with
>> +the keys above during this last call. We need to be sure that the RFC
>> +had been read by people committed to take care of the project, since it
>> +proposes an important change.
>> +
>> +When a positive consensus is reached, the RFC becomes effective. If not,
>> +the proposal is archived and the status quo continues.
>
> It seems unchanged compared to v3. WDYT of my comments, suggestions,
> and proposed wording:
>
> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736#9
>
> ?
Quoting:
> I think committers here are mentioned as a simple way to express
> membership and avoid infiltration, but it has the downside of ign=
oring
> many members and giving committers a special privilege.
It=E2=80=99s not about infiltration, it=E2=80=99s about to be sure that peo=
ple agree and
do not overlook.
> I propose this definition: anyone who is on a team (in =E2=80=98t=
eams.scm=E2=80=99) is a
> voting member*.
I agree.
> We can keep a quorum, but I think 50% of the voters is too ambiti=
ous;
> maybe 25%?
Well, I picked 50% almost randomly. ;-) Somehow, I do not have a strong
opinion. My concern is only to be sure that we have a consensus and not
something falling between the cracks.
> This would become=C2=B9:
>
> Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days =
to cast
> one of the following votes about the RFC:
>
> - Support (+1);
> - Accept (0);
> - Reject (-2).
>
> Votes are cast by replying on the patch-tracking entry of the R=
FC.
>
> The RFC is accepted if (1) at least 25% of the voting members c=
ast a
> vote, and (2) the sum of votes is non-negative. In other cases=
, the
> RFC is withdrawn.
For me, if we have only one minus, it means we do not have consensus.
Therefore, the person who cannot live with the proposal must be
proactive in finding a solution that we all agree on.
In other words, the numbers are not for being summed, the aim is to
capture:
- Support
- I can with with it
- I cannot live with it
BTW, I do not like the word =E2=80=9CReject=E2=80=9D and I prefer =E2=80=9C=
Disagree=E2=80=9D or even
better =E2=80=9CI cannot live with it=E2=80=9D.
> I think we should now make sure we reach consensus on the timeline, and
> in particular:
>
> 1. on the voting process;
Maybe I misunderstand something. From my point, we do not =E2=80=9Cvote=E2=
=80=9D
because we are trying to work using consensus. When I proposed +1/0/-1
my aim was not to =E2=80=9Cvote=E2=80=9C but to be sure that the proposal i=
s not
overlooked.
Therefore, instead of =E2=80=9CVoting Period=E2=80=9D, I would prefer =E2=
=80=9CReplying Period=E2=80=9D
or something like that.
WDYT?
Cheers,
simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Dec 2024 14:42:43 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Dec 23 09:42:43 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53859 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tPjdr-0000cc-26
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:42:43 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:43250)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tPjdm-0000cG-NS
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:42:41 -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 1tPjdg-00017G-J8; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:42:32 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=Wb88rUaXkP/6CWAX+EpSp7SdyJ9hEEQhJqiQvki49dc=; b=EW3hmWYBnO2id9SZDjle
Q2Z0Zr21iYEEQgaKsIKpoj8tbNXKRHbGW0kLQ0Ty9lab2XcBXtc66deZ//aUAivrZyb8IHPr6AAg3
hsVALVpVOLeoZRyuPhd38atzTeSeYPl6+4tMJpZaDXyEeLCRQ18iMr0jPAGSyECWfthg5LgtWRuEi
Iac9rYz9YMZIQ4+wA1C9Vi394H1z1uyhdJbHWT0O2KwXLiyTZyFLgPJiRl6a2QNS4EX9u3MM9U4Ek
8FFSsHlhVvMTdI1YVWF0jY8G11uJKTSDwpgX/EpSfRLCyotTiGF+GOMaRWyBhFBZgDyHPnR/f+d3c
Rmr/x/1QBF7ViA==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
(=?utf-8?Q?=22No=C3=A9?= Lopez"'s message of "Sun, 22 Dec 2024 14:56:56
+0100")
References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 15:42:24 +0100
Message-ID: <87ikraea0f.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 No=C3=A9,
Thanks for this new version.
No=C3=A9 Lopez <noe@no=C3=A9.eu> skribis:
> +### Submission (up to 7 days)
> +
> +The author submits their RFC proposal as a regular patch and look for
> +co-supporter(s). See =E2=80=9CCo-supporter=E2=80=9D section.
> +
> +Once the RFC is co-supported, it marks the start of a discussion period.
[...]
> +### Last call (up to 14 days)
> +
> +The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a last grace period
> +of 14 days is granted. People are asked to agree or disagree by
> +commenting:
> +
> +- +1 / LGTM: I support
> +- =3D0 / LGTM: I will live with it
> +- -1: I disagree with this proposal
> +
> +At least half of people with commit access must express their voice with
> +the keys above during this last call. We need to be sure that the RFC
> +had been read by people committed to take care of the project, since it
> +proposes an important change.
> +
> +When a positive consensus is reached, the RFC becomes effective. If not,
> +the proposal is archived and the status quo continues.
It seems unchanged compared to v3. WDYT of my comments, suggestions,
and proposed wording:
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/74736#9
?
I think we should now make sure we reach consensus on the timeline, and
in particular:
1. on the voting process;
2. on the submission -> withdrawn transition, in case nobody supports
the RFC.
Once we have that, we can fine-tune the language and hopefully be done
within a couple of weeks.
I like the Dot graph you submitted! Here=E2=80=99s an updated version, wit=
h a
new submission -> withdrawn arrow (as proposed in the comment above) and
with hopefully clearer names (in particular =E2=80=9CVoting Period=E2=80=9D=
rather than
=E2=80=9CLast call=E2=80=9D):
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
digraph "RFC Timeline" {
submission[label=3D<Submission Period<br />7=C2=A0days>]
comments[label=3D<Discussion Period<br />30=E2=80=9360=C2=A0days>]
last_call[label=3D<Voting Period<br />14=C2=A0days>]
withdrawn[label=3DWithdrawn, shape=3Drectangle]
final[label=3DFinal, shape=3Drectangle]
=20=20=20=20
submission -> comments
submission -> withdrawn
comments -> last_call
last_call -> withdrawn
last_call -> final
=20=20=20=20
withdrawn -> submission [label=3D"New version"]
=20=20=20=20
comments -> withdrawn
}
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Thoughts?
Thanks for getting the ball rolling!
Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Dec 2024 13:56:08 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Dec 22 08:56:08 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49441 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tPMRC-0005YG-AG for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 08:56:07 -0500 Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([194.63.252.55]:34631) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tPMR9-0005Xi-4W for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 08:56:05 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:From: Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=2lAvEAjG8i7JB3wUO48vzZ6BfH1VovmLcpjuqHkucWI=; b=O 3yBlyRIYFX2ab02xwdOtc5Ibwcp6uPlf4w/hO36DO1wFA6WZZMNyO0o3aFYzsQWoayIUX9M6t6lpc nnl4zr8Dka+GA9jA+wMqy/wpWPEtTHfb7PUf0HDB60jwA5oig497i7bOkEMYDyxGKpue7wjaTqmIC Bgy2PXgRVCOETw6Df8p7UsvDrS5ETvNWV9o0Ewfpu+dQBoCG/dAbXQ3xj1iOmp2nNAB7C92Gydw1N NeXTEVj6gpmCim5ALValJUnR90+aH+ymIdwx+wlX1YeTkEwCDBdyLoO3vM3UQm+8uc2eUshgfPVHI p32KSCJ4cy2FCBQniyqyQA7I+Eo2ijfCA==; Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1tPMR3-00DUSN-FQ; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 14:55:57 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: [PATCH v4 1/1] rfc: Add Request-For-Comment process. Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 14:56:56 +0100 Message-ID: <aa5f6bcd5ebf3ddafc6f56155a23bd0c4223db8b.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Debbugs-Cc: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@HIDDEN> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noe@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 (-) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> * rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt: New file. Co-authored-by: Noé Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> Change-Id: Ide88e70dc785ab954ccb42fb043625db12191208 --- rfc/0001-rfc-process.md | 254 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 254 insertions(+) create mode 100644 rfc/0001-rfc-process.md diff --git a/rfc/0001-rfc-process.md b/rfc/0001-rfc-process.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..7db420c824 --- /dev/null +++ b/rfc/0001-rfc-process.md @@ -0,0 +1,254 @@ +- Issue: 66844 +- Status: pending +- Supporter: Simon Tournier +- Co-supporters: Noé Lopez + +# Summary + +The “RFC” (request for comments) process is intended to provide a +consistent and structured path for major changes and features to enter +the Guix project, so that all stakeholders can make decisions +collectively and be confident about the direction it is evolving in. + +# Motivation + +The current way that we add new features to Guix has been good for early +development, but it is starting to show its limits as Guix becomes a +broadly used system with many contributors. Changes might be slowed down +by the lack of structure to acquire consensus, lack of a central place +to consult contributors and users, and lack of clear deadlines. This is +a proposal for a more principled RFC process to make it a more integral +part of the overall development process, and one that is followed +consistently to introduce substantial features. + +There are a number of changes that are significant enough that they +could benefit from wider community consensus before being introduced. +Either because they introduce new concepts, big changes or are +controversial enough that not everybody will consent on the direction to +take. + +Therefore, the purpose of this RFC is to introduce a process that allows +to bring the discussion upfront and strengthen decisions. This RFC is +used to bootstrap the process and further RFCs can be used to refine the +process. + +It covers significant changes, where “significant” means any change that +could only be reverted at a high cost, or any change with the potential +to disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples +include: + +- changing the \<package\> record type and/or its interfaces; +- adding or removing a 'guix' sub-command; +- changing the channel mechanism; +- changing project policy such as teams, decision-making, the + deprecation policy or this very document; +- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure + (mailing lists, source code repository and forge, continuous + integration, etc.) + +For concrete past examples where this RFC process would be helpful: + +- Removing input labels from package definitions, #49169 +- Add \'guix shell\' to subsume \'guix environment\', #50960 +- Trustable \"guix pull\", #22883 +- Add \"Deprecation Policy\", #72840 +- Collaboration via team and branch-features, several places over all + the mailing lists. + +# Detailed design + +## When to follow this process + +This process is followed when one intends to make “substantial” +changes to the Guix project. What constitutes a “substantial” change +is evolving based on community norms, but may include the following. + +- Changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on + - Command-line interfaces + - Core Scheme interfaces +- Big restructuring of packages +- Hard to revert changes +- Governance and changes to the way we collaborate + +Certain changes do not require an RFC: + +- Adding, updating packages, removing outdated packages +- Fixing security updates and bugs that don’t break interfaces + +For general day-to-day contributions, please follow the regular process +as described by manual sections “Submitting Patches”, “Reviewing the +Work of Others”, “Teams” and “Making Decisions”. + +A patch submission that contains any of the aforementioned substantial +changes may be asked to first submit a RFC. + +## How the process works + +1. Clone <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git> +2. Copy rfc/0000-template.org to rfc/00XY-good-name.org where good-name + is descriptive but not too long and XY increments +3. Fill RFC +4. Submit to guix-patches@HIDDEN +5. Announce your RFC to guix-devel@HIDDEN + +Make sure the proposal is as well-written as you would expect the final +version of it to be. It does not mean that all the subtilities must be +considered at this point since that is the aim of review discussion. It +means that the RFC process is not a prospective brainstorming and the +proposal formalize an idea for making it happen. + +The submission of a proposal does not require an implementation. +However, to improve the chance of a successful RFC, it is recommended to +have an idea for implementing it. If an implementation is attached to +the detailed design, it might help the discussion. + +At this point, at least one other person must volunteer to be +“co-supporter”. The aim is to improve the chances that the RFC is both +desired and likely to be implemented. + +Once supporter and co-supporter(s) are committed in the RFC process, the +review discussion starts. Publicizing of the RFC on the project’s +mailing list named guix-devel is mandatory, and on other main +communication channels is highly recommended. + +After a number of rounds of review, the discussion should settle and a +general consensus should emerge. Please follow the “Decision Process” +and “Timeline” sections. + +A successful RFC is not a rubber stamp, and in particular still does not +mean the feature will ultimately be merged; it does mean that in +principle all the participants have agreed to the feature and are +amenable to merging it. + +An unsuccessful RFC is **not** a judgment on the value of the work, so a +refusal should rather be interpreted as “let's discuss again with a +different angle”. The last state of an unsuccessful RFC is archived +under the directory rfc/withdrawn/. + +## Co-supporter + +A co-supporter is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project's +practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a +contributor with commit access. The co-supporter helps the supporter, +they are both charged with keeping the proposal moving through the +process. The co-supporter role is to help the proposal supporter by +being the timekeeper and helps in pushing forward until process +completion. + +The co-supporter doesn’t necessarily have to agree with all the points +of the RFC but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions +are a good thing for the community. + +## Timeline + +The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following recommended +periods: + +submission (7d) ⟶ comments (30--60d) ⟶ last call (14d) ⟶ withdrawn OR +final + +The author may withdraw their RFC proposal at any time; and it might be +submitted again. + +### Submission (up to 7 days) + +The author submits their RFC proposal as a regular patch and look for +co-supporter(s). See “Co-supporter” section. + +Once the RFC is co-supported, it marks the start of a discussion period. + +### Comment (at least 30 days, up to 60 days) + +The comment period starts once the author publishes their RFC to +guix-devel, then the proposal is freely discussed for a period of at +least 30 days. It is up to the supporter and co-supporter(s) to ensure +that sufficient discussion is solicited. Please make sure that all have +the time and space for expressing their comments. The proposal is about +significant changes, thus more opinions is better than less. + +The author is encouraged to publish updated versions of their RFC at any +point during the discussion period. + +Once the discussion goes stale or after 60 days, the author must +summarize the state of the conversation and keep the final version. + +It moves to the last call period. + +### Last call (up to 14 days) + +The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a last grace period +of 14 days is granted. People are asked to agree or disagree by +commenting: + +- +1 / LGTM: I support +- =0 / LGTM: I will live with it +- -1: I disagree with this proposal + +At least half of people with commit access must express their voice with +the keys above during this last call. We need to be sure that the RFC +had been read by people committed to take care of the project, since it +proposes an important change. + +When a positive consensus is reached, the RFC becomes effective. If not, +the proposal is archived and the status quo continues. + +## Decision making: consensus + +It is expected from all contributors, and even more so from committers, +to help build consensus and make decisions based on consensus. By using +consensus, we are committed to finding solutions that everyone can live +with. + +It implies that no decision is made against significant concerns and +these concerns are actively resolved with proposals that work for +everyone. A contributor, without or with commit access, wishing to block +a proposal bears a special responsibility for finding alternatives, +proposing ideas/code or explaining the rationale for the status quo. + +To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer +details, you are encouraged to read +<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>. + +## Merging the outcome + +Once a consesus is made, a committer should do the following to merge +the RFC: + +1. Fill in the remaining metadata in the RFC header, including links + for the original submission. +2. Commit everything. +3. Announce the establishment of the RFC to all. + +## Template of RFC + +The structure of the RFC is captured by the template; see the file +rfc/0000-template.txt. Please use Markdown as markup language. + +## Backward compatibility + +None. + +## Forward compatibility + +The RFC process can be refined by further RFCs. + +## Drawbacks + +There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution +more than it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a +way to help contribution, not an end in itself. + +Of course, group decision-making processes are difficult to manage. + +The ease of commenting may bring a slightly diminished signal-to-noise +ratio in collected feedback, particularly on easily bike-shedded topics. + +## Open questions + +There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process. +While we want to ensure that changes which affect the users are +well-considered, we certainly don’t want the process to become unduly +burdensome. This is a careful balance which will require care to +maintain moving forward. + +# Unresolved questions -- 2.46.0
zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Dec 2024 13:55:56 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Dec 22 08:55:56 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49436 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tPMR1-0005XX-Rm
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 08:55:56 -0500
Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([194.63.252.55]:36957)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tPMQy-0005XA-2b
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 08:55:54 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:
MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:
Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:
Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:
Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:
List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
bh=XW5mszUScd8Igc2TCbG+P/3OWefKD3eGPEb5TkVmBKU=; b=2wzCTBvefed7qFxgXGks5E/xDD
DMK2SpqdY8UEqDH3gEUng7R5sbuPA3+Eo3VtgWxxUA5YAFqKwgpjfTDpf2eyRVi7mM7YN77knaBYe
/0fXUy/sTwOWBjWZJtIbkgHVTGEuqu+jEQo1jPWEpYZMLYTnzb/Rw4ZOvJD5Q+iaXNtARlMRL/5Be
KbK8azYDLNBQATZYixXzVT1/D6Ju7jLQJYmIjgx54r/ED003AXvIyEblsDcw6G6H7ly2Prf6IIDn1
N7tAj3zd3LNf26xVWqNfLunEwiVhZy6XB1qaK6VBSD124LWF3YFKQp8wqqFz4XXJfAZyz6r43HWJ2
FYJORgtg==;
Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95)
id 1tPMQr-00DUSN-Gj; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 14:55:45 +0100
From: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 0/1] rfc: Add Request-For-Comment process.
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 14:56:55 +0100
Message-ID: <cover.1734875359.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Debbugs-Cc: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@HIDDEN>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noelopez@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 (-)
From: Noé Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>
Hi,
Here is a fourth version, I have changed to Markdown format using Pandoc, and
fixed some typos.
I dropped the template for now to ease the process. We can bring it back once
there is consensus on the main document.
I tried making a Graphviz diagram but I’m not convinced:
digraph "RFC Lifetime" {
submission[label=<Submission<br />7 days>]
comments[label=<Comments<br />30–60 days>]
last_call[label=<Last call<br />14 days>]
withdrawn[label=Withdrawn, shape=rectangle]
final[label=Final, shape=rectangle]
submission -> comments
comments -> last_call
last_call -> withdrawn
last_call -> final
withdrawn -> submission [label="New version"]
comments -> withdrawn
}
Good evening and holidays,
Noé
Simon Tournier (1):
rfc: Add Request-For-Comment process.
rfc/0001-rfc-process.md | 254 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 254 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 rfc/0001-rfc-process.md
base-commit: 1affd2b5aa7f5467a44cf757c4fc0c6956d3f3c9
--
2.46.0
zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Dec 2024 13:07:53 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Dec 22 08:07:52 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49362 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tPLgW-0003AL-H1 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 08:07:52 -0500 Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([194.63.252.55]:39023) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tPLgS-0003A3-BB for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 08:07:51 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:From: Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=mfAHPd/WPrDesscp2v0vKnLYPKa0v2LXUO9ZV8xud1c=; b=I xJfCwL/bLFLyWCrqGkIqWJRB74PjJ2zhyvF3+MChIysMUL+7Psg9FnReiQMlXJ9lMUIEckDi4s8A/ /xk/TQDd0OQmJfUEH8z5/Vd7unJvxF+zJacK884/ZD++vgS1ejd5wxaAjd2QQGFK1Jp2C6sixHIeX 5KrIXBdDzZXkefb57nS0PAbQHIF4ZPHUYbqghhTZTyWstsS5Guo++e//2BU/3Dgak/jFKRRiSc+3g wUAa6nOGVfwRRBio+LRAboAV6BFcV5PoMeorPczcwxWxwixDoy1ucL5vvkc4JsKQoj/VJRqcUwN6/ KJp9EG0NFWcD1Eae5yiJk1czcT/0bXJAQ==; Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1tPLeF-00DKQX-EA; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 14:05:31 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] rfc: Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <493bcc076f206ec134959268f55a9358b4886b88.1734031781.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> References: <493bcc076f206ec134959268f55a9358b4886b88.1734031781.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 14:06:56 +0100 Message-ID: <8734ifdfyn.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 (-) Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> writes: > +** Timeline > + > +The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following recommended peri= ods: What does recommended mean in this case? Do you mean that someone can skip any period they want or reduce the time if consesus is reached or something else? > +It moves to the last call period. > + > +*** Last call (up to 14 days) There should be a lower limit. > + > +The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a last grace period = of 14 > +days is granted. People are asked to agree or disagree by commenting: > + > + - +1 / LGTM: I support > + - =3D0 / LGTM: I will live with it > + - -1: I disagree with this proposal > + > +At least half of people with commit acces must express their voice with = the > +keys above during this last call. We need to be sure that the RFC had b= een > +read by people committed to take care of the project, since it proposes = an > +important change. I would add that a person with commit access that does not vote counts as +1 or =3D0. Though I doubt if a voting process like this is good for consensus: if 5 people are for and 4 against it should not pass. I like Ludo=E2=80=99s idea of using teams, but I fear that for some changes people might not care enough to have even 25% of them vote.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Dec 2024 10:47:32 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Dec 14 05:47:32 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45673 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tMPgK-0001ux-02
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 14 Dec 2024 05:47:32 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46864)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tMPgH-0001ue-92
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 14 Dec 2024 05:47:30 -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 1tMPgA-00059y-CT; Sat, 14 Dec 2024 05:47:22 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=79hXUh1B/ZE2cQAsAxdwbHrbE/hUF8mOMCLBynUYE/c=; b=nLGym1jrEM/WDv1pPCsX
8HK5X2WjhrkwuM2LDTHumNfTcL+WOEqkyg7aSJSO6CU5pv07qQxwnNb3n8IylEbvhIjlE76YxBuWK
eYbUSK4VXpm6qV2wYiCVZ3JSc3NOkCLUDTvTqNirHUUsv3lZxcMQJatMzIDOoCQ2RJUvqrawy5U/g
OBjcNQZ8czNiPMUAaRrdjAloz9Lv3FSU3r9g2DU5/jnC/bQPJl1T1bVMz/HHY8jpJ9kbD6BZ1g42G
4s/2l0gq5Er3hQ9tgJPbfcEAAWNRZp0Wir/smCVsL9oWf8ndfvlzZ0Zw/UtJk+bhvmlcCkCc9biQF
d9aUZTsytkHz3A==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v3] rfc: Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <493bcc076f206ec134959268f55a9358b4886b88.1734031781.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
(Simon Tournier's message of "Thu, 12 Dec 2024 20:30:56 +0100")
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<493bcc076f206ec134959268f55a9358b4886b88.1734031781.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2024 11:47:19 +0100
Message-ID: <87h676mthk.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
Christopher Baines <mail@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 (---)
Thanks for v3!
Some of my more superficial comments earlier this week remain
unaddressed:
=E2=80=A2 I think it should be Markdown, and in a separate repo.
=E2=80=A2 There are too many explicit references to Debbugs, which I thin=
k is
not future-proof.
I think the text itself needs more work to address and remove remaining
comments that appear in the body, to improve grammar and wording, and to
make it shorter (it=E2=80=99s way too long IMO). But that can come in a se=
cond
phase.
Questions/comments about the process that I overlooked before:
> +The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following recommended peri=
ods:
> +
> + submission (7d) =E2=9F=B6 comments (30=E2=80=9360d) =E2=9F=B6 last cal=
l (14d) =E2=9F=B6 withdrawn OR final
This diagram doesn=E2=80=99t show everything I think; for example=E2=80=A6
> +*** Submission (up to 7 days)
> +
> +The author submits their RFC proposal as a regular patch and look for
> +co-supporter(s). See 'Co-supporter' section.
> +
> +Once the RFC is co-supported, it marks the start of a discussion period.
=E2=80=A6 what happens when the submitter doesn=E2=80=99t find supporters i=
n that
period? I=E2=80=99m guessing the RFC goes in =E2=80=9Cwithdrawn=E2=80=9D st=
ate?
The diagram should reflect that, and we can render it with Dot.
> +*** Last call (up to 14 days)
> +
> +The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a last grace period =
of 14
> +days is granted. People are asked to agree or disagree by commenting:
> +
> + - +1 / LGTM: I support
> + - =3D0 / LGTM: I will live with it
> + - -1: I disagree with this proposal
> +
> +At least half of people with commit acces must express their voice with =
the
> +keys above during this last call. We need to be sure that the RFC had b=
een
> +read by people committed to take care of the project, since it proposes =
an
> +important change.
I think committers here are mentioned as a simple way to express
membership and avoid infiltration, but it has the downside of ignoring
many members and giving committers a special privilege.
I propose this definition: anyone who is on a team (in =E2=80=98teams.scm=
=E2=80=99) is a
voting member*.
We can keep a quorum, but I think 50% of the voters is too ambitious;
maybe 25%?
This would become=C2=B9:
Once the final version is published, team members have 14 days to cast
one of the following votes about the RFC:
- Support (+1);
- Accept (0);
- Reject (-2).
Votes are cast by replying on the patch-tracking entry of the RFC.
The RFC is accepted if (1) at least 25% of the voting members cast a
vote, and (2) the sum of votes is non-negative. In other cases, the
RFC is withdrawn.
Thoughts?
Ludo=E2=80=99.
* We=E2=80=99ll have to create new teams and update them so we don=E2=80=99=
t forget
anyone, notably translators, sysadmins, graphics designers, and so on.
=C2=B9 Inspired by
<https://codeberg.org/mergiraf/mergiraf/src/branch/main/GOVERNANCE.md>.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Dec 2024 10:06:39 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Dec 14 05:06:39 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45556 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tMP2h-0008MS-66 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 14 Dec 2024 05:06:39 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44796) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tMP2Z-0008MA-VU for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 14 Dec 2024 05:06:32 -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 1tMP2R-0001Vk-Hv; Sat, 14 Dec 2024 05:06:19 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=lgd8+r9C/gP59+QAP8FjfA3NmSLn+x9OGfmB4Prdh18=; b=sUQOfIAE5WX8p3PoiHO7 Rx6WMagYBP23ElbKbquSgWHDFP3uj2c0IX6y+j95rHTfV5mWaIXyesVbxSt7HIP1778QY/3UZC3Lq gNZXsJH0hJDL/hnaKnNySmLgEfhI7y+Ig+cYLLpZpFazce/5mxyy3c6n2VphrHnGnzR9XYY1O0IjX TFlt1xkAkV7dQc4/dDz9AKeEVI6TqiJdtiIK7ZEV67snxgjmz8gRIhxvd466I8wJsW6p7A7kNd1EZ rufHg2M1hMkqYcB/PPkn9PFCQlig0eLo0ZS9UXrxwnEnmLFQgeD+wmZtqEkqqkUMHNrJHxcFKIT88 KkCaY8OjXPOqyQ==; From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <87ed2cn0oq.fsf@HIDDEN> (Simon Tournier's message of "Thu, 12 Dec 2024 20:47:17 +0100") References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <09ff9f31af0575ba5223bf713f166101e79b8d99.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <875xno7oqg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> <87ed2cn0oq.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2024 11:06:15 +0100 Message-ID: <87v7vmo9yg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, Steve George <steve@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, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> skribis: >>> +** Decision making: consensus >> >> =E2=80=A6 and drop this. > > I think it makes more sense to have the Decision Making as RFC and then > the manual refers to it, and not the converse. ;-) > > Therefore, I would keep the section here. And once we are done, letting > the manual as-is, I would link to RFC. > > What defines the Decision Making *is* RFC and not the manual. ;-) Earlier, I wrote: > I would add =E2=80=9CGeneral day-to-day contributions follow the regular > [decision-making process] and [team organization].=E2=80=9D, with referen= ces to > the relevant sections of the manual. Since (1) day-to-day contributions do not follow the RFC process and (2) teams and consensus-based decision making are already defined (and went through peer review), I think it makes more sense to build on these two sections we already have. >>> +* Unresolved questions >> >> I think these two sections in the context of this foundational document >> look a bit ridiculous. :-) But maybe that=E2=80=99s okay? > > I think that the first RFC must respects what it asks to other RFC. ;-) > > And if the consensus is not reached, we need a place to summarize the > unresolved discussion, no? I already mentioned it back in February, FWIW: <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/66844#3-lineno186>. Anyway, no big deal, but it will certainly look strange eventually. Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Dec 2024 19:48:39 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 12 14:48:39 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40417 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tLpAs-0005DM-IM for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 14:48:39 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f52.google.com ([209.85.221.52]:56711) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tLpAm-0005Cy-1j for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 14:48:36 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f52.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-385ddcfc97bso757665f8f.1 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:48:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1734032846; x=1734637646; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=ZzHG4QI2ixC3fezFXZk/L1KoWSp/eW01/BpfTHfwWLk=; b=gGEDVBrGrYZH+Ao7JykDEkrNFyxDG8PIhxy3zYDghoZiiD2FZPg/iGDVE5oRphUic2 FNjucMHdvzssMOfUv2v+A9TBaI76WKhSO73epeG2YiZOxjpJYZomPa+zB3oSeyLxmVO0 0agEnG/SWQnn/9TeHz4jaaXQWYKAUesrAmVLiBl7h/sCwoQSMiJSq//Q5i9mh5fvuf6m NDJHPMGVvQoAXrKXi0DmAU1rMKI659JvS8RAeHxZVqJthvDPgPqWtx3QgBxg634KHcCr +rOu0KI/eCIX+pwBCqQA2fYkgCG5W/T7KwnoxVHP4mmSZZTPd1agFGTBHMmZq0fsSyQ8 vdqQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1734032846; x=1734637646; 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=ZzHG4QI2ixC3fezFXZk/L1KoWSp/eW01/BpfTHfwWLk=; b=bLqMLZp697KaWGYFuIIBZcgZC5ivODDFbG1OnXi8vEU1Ouv98OFnctFpcvqas8Z34+ 0sSlLf5bLHl3w8r7fVucj4ZuQndJMXSUZiFyHAJ3g/EnjXh/PsXgHTB3oVZEXKCuuy01 9kBzCz61pGNr4PlSu7GAHgGblxZ4AlcpgXpMUjhF7QfTZ3T4LYXIJ/KOoeDCwN8UHQKI hQfkULxpFY4V5tUFKCAFpPaWLuGDU3R0Gl1s90zn0Anz1AeLHmpvlSIwYNsCW6m76k58 EfdY3K12dY5ERjSgn9+s1pieUf8rKolB7MU7cDvIGyS/+3uNSSPGc2K/QLZCLDSR5vU3 lHYQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyvxuGYbveJjL/UIoL3VLttyymp9W+l2fnMyUEK3TH/sUQYecVx 5rsqkwerM0RGrucAAU4TS99qEIB/oLbU+pgZ4KylHGmhzzS4I65Q X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctj5JLyRVxJ5c/q47x0fS/VP1EOFRigp9o/+0yNYkBwwnEJWzUZvpzfjgsyDSh qXBU52BYV6W+BffTGREugACzV5+tUy+djhMsX8JBwe+IlKQnS08XEwKD8xIr0vnTtjmNWhzqgaM yl9HKoM+0Jd2+6u2/q4k20/IcQn7hG39lJId5fq9qbPnfgb7T2tjcb6IMBZTueL7myo2lcM1TcR torC9NQHiCLAHc1M0khHNcbi3PTevozRVqmXaeCWuVTCZJaJuPIf9l9PaphnDYUDoBsQQbF1yJv Y1Qz6ZdZGDMQRunTel81Hm6QVTDNyoXvyyaQ9J1Vxgk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHxfK+7+y3Y/s3PSpd4NnhbiSkSinWNJefeC2oIoVtjz1PtiWR3cWB/GXIiTaperAHo7jMe6g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:788:b0:385:e374:be1 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3878768dc9bmr4340116f8f.13.1734032845779; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:47:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from lili (2a01cb08829ff8006d2f327432852397.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb08:829f:f800:6d2f:3274:3285:2397]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-387824a3fa7sm4863810f8f.24.2024.12.12.11.47.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:47:25 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>, =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. In-Reply-To: <875xno7oqg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <09ff9f31af0575ba5223bf713f166101e79b8d99.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> <875xno7oqg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 20:47:17 +0100 Message-ID: <87ed2cn0oq.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: 74736 Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, Steve George <steve@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 all, Thanks No=C3=A9! I added you as co-supporter; someone definitively required. ;-) Thanks Steve for reaching me some weeks end ago. Well, based on No=C3=A9=E2=80=99s v2, I polished some comments and sent v3;= based on what my follow up started weeks (months?) ago. On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 at 19:14, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@HIDDEN> wrote: > These are changes from the past that may long be forgotten by the time > we read them. Perhaps we can abstract it a bit, like: > > - changing the <package> record type and/or its interfaces; > - adding or removing a =E2=80=98guix=E2=80=99 sub-command; > - changing the channel mechanism; > - changing project policy such as teams, decision-making, the > deprecation policy or this very document; > - changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure > (mailing lists, source code repository and forge, continuous > integration, etc.) > > This list seems redundant with and similar to that under =E2=80=9CWhen To= Follow > This Process=E2=80=9D; maybe just keep it in one place, under =E2=80=9CWh= en To Follow=E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D? I think it helps to understand. Concrete examples always help, IMHO. Therefore, I propose what your wording. Then, past examples where this RFC process would have been helpful, I guess. >> + 1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git > > I would suggest a separate repo. Bah since we are putting all there=E2=80=A6 When you see etc/ ;-) >> +** Decision making: consensus > > =E2=80=A6 and drop this. I think it makes more sense to have the Decision Making as RFC and then the manual refers to it, and not the converse. ;-) Therefore, I would keep the section here. And once we are done, letting the manual as-is, I would link to RFC. What defines the Decision Making *is* RFC and not the manual. ;-) > Maybe we should define the role of =E2=80=9CRFC editors=E2=80=9D (or =E2= =80=9CRFC team=E2=80=9D?), which > would be the people responsible for doing those changes. I=E2=80=99ve drop this =E2=80=9CRFC teams=E2=80=9C or =E2=80=9CRFC editors= =E2=80=9D because in my initial idea, this is the aim of =E2=80=9Cco-supporter(s)=E2=80=9D. See the relevant sec= tion; does it need to be improved? >> +** Backward Compatibility >> + >> +None. >> + >> +** Forward compatibility > > I=E2=80=99m not sure what=E2=80=99s expected in these sections. Maybe = =E2=80=9CCompatibility > Considerations=E2=80=9D would be more appropriate? Yes, maybe =E2=80=9CCompatibility Consideration=E2=80=9D. It needs to be i= n agreement with the template. >> +* Unresolved questions > > I think these two sections in the context of this foundational document > look a bit ridiculous. :-) But maybe that=E2=80=99s okay? I think that the first RFC must respects what it asks to other RFC. ;-) And if the consensus is not reached, we need a place to summarize the unresolved discussion, no? Again, thanks No=C3=A9 and Steve for taking care of that! Cheers, simon
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Dec 2024 19:32:20 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 12 14:32:19 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40382 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tLov4-0004MQ-PZ
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 14:32:19 -0500
Received: from [209.85.128.43] (port=49328 helo=mail-wm1-f43.google.com)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>) id 1tLov1-0004Lg-4k
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 14:32:17 -0500
Received: by mail-wm1-f43.google.com with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-43623f0c574so7198475e9.2
for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:32:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1734031861; x=1734636661; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc
:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=U700yMN/nuxPIudi/5OFAsPsChF3o2G1TayxESeDVdc=;
b=nh/pOTcWNtQXALHxWr0X2FE8nNwGQmWlIoDIISilP1YTKEo73HN3huzEfuBLJn7A0D
xfIiUVRg63VBxuFcSerhfZC40UY9ulDK5ASglvg1szfWEQTof+aWO3ofs07lWjj7/d1G
O9Ed7hFcVSv2ALrSgsSdsAROVZ5HfWZxATuRVZEK3lO50Fc7LjhUh5khf/qkbQXLT5rC
6Rai5Vl1ZLXHmoeTyb6p12QXDqUFIKwO8chnYe2NZZjIQ4La/nDZG6Hs4b4z3KnzAWBd
oIVatZEtq9VrKOX0gW8iyTsuUFZBPmRmk4kXnqPBNdNgJrLiLNNRm96GIKXU+15x4CA2
aV8w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1734031861; x=1734636661;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc
:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to;
bh=U700yMN/nuxPIudi/5OFAsPsChF3o2G1TayxESeDVdc=;
b=JfewcYRcg6Itft8J++REglKq3+IffslswetgqAfGuURZwX+IWigtyIBJC+Kq2xeyLc
3KP1cEHIITv8AfQrcPCAwYhKoWcDgBBCv2A111LXdUPiJB02ZkWFvY2g8VXUK7rj9PuT
jj9NznYk04lMMnz2zd4swE2YaCsD8Yv29KNji2LtNfsAW3U+vBuz0PA06SLJ/GID1fs6
UJv9qTS9icdusleOxbqTFRdqrl8EgndiV2SR4yibwPl7wa409Qm3b3OX91jO0m1dWRYF
y9SVOoKZChEfaomnSlVakW019M6RIa312HaxnnNeeQQqXAzpbYvb+BC3rlq3BFozVan9
FLuw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzcrHAXGz10EEnyLKcUJ+W1S9gOLQ2LD2JL7aGo87TbO3RZciuA
Zq3CKl3ak/dAZdDRX7UVYzE4pAUmsdCSf1OYslt9DdAR5aL2q9RrrRcRIQ==
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctg9USEr3wKtvNWvYqaRLTcc85Arb7RSeLAluxSdyrPhVl8Q3QYbPMLL5K4vDH
QIAqE7Rp1ygR/exVULBoPL5eafjsaR/VYfo5HPEgLxtoKDGGbmSIbct4TS+YKUvxrsacImWZ+Az
x0csp+FOBNoYQ/jfxGYc0Q5JzvQ8mCGZC/mI2T628H5Vv3WFjpKjg6InDgXnbwYO3w11W0BhDn3
fVMe2XCWteSqdGa2P5YRAuXwNqoLQCFEwSuJsphhmq+b9sjFtv76Ft7h9G8VFjVIUasIOAEr2dQ
dzVon9aFoRP/6JOzG5/iJi8VCs7R6784IFMGKCPSQdQchMM/squgerx8kJPiMGYJ8w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFLqZDv2o/O1BSys/sRSZLzzETTDZeeYfZj3OneN3o7A97eFlZg2rMtSMguvoBiRxPle5ZZPQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3b09:b0:436:1b7a:c0b4 with SMTP id
5b1f17b1804b1-4361c3454dbmr66100905e9.1.1734031860712;
Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:31:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain
(2a01cb08829ff8006d2f327432852397.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr.
[2a01:cb08:829f:f800:6d2f:3274:3285:2397])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
5b1f17b1804b1-43625553234sm26351415e9.3.2024.12.12.11.30.59
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:31:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] rfc: Add Request-For-Comment process.
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 20:30:56 +0100
Message-ID: <493bcc076f206ec134959268f55a9358b4886b88.1734031781.git.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.46.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+)
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: * rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt: New file. * rfc/0000-template.txt:
New file. Co-authored-by: Noé Lopez Change-Id: Ide88e70dc785ab954ccb42fb043625db12191208
--- rfc/0000-template.txt | 76 ++++++++++++ rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt | 248
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 f [...]
Content analysis details: (1.3 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The
query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[209.85.128.43 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com]
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (zimon.toutoune[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[209.85.128.43 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2)
[209.85.128.43 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
0.0 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE:
The query to Validity was blocked. See
https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243
for more information.
[209.85.128.43 listed in sa-trusted.bondedsender.org]
1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736
Cc: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noelopez@HIDDEN>,
=?UTF-8?q?Ludovic=20Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>,
Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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: 0.3 (/)
* rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt: New file.
* rfc/0000-template.txt: New file.
Co-authored-by: Noé Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
Change-Id: Ide88e70dc785ab954ccb42fb043625db12191208
---
rfc/0000-template.txt | 76 ++++++++++++
rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt | 248 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 324 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 rfc/0000-template.txt
create mode 100644 rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt
diff --git a/rfc/0000-template.txt b/rfc/0000-template.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..8c4077e753
--- /dev/null
+++ b/rfc/0000-template.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+# -*- mode:org -*-
+#+TITLE: <The meaningful name of the proposal>
+#+DATE: <date when the process starts>
+
++ Issue: <number assigned by Debbugs>
++ Status: <pending|done|unsuccessful|deprecated>
++ Supporter: <Your Name>
++ Co-supporter(s): <Some> <Names>
+
+* Summary
+
+A one-paragraph explanation. Main sales pitch.
+
+* Motivation
+
+Describe the problem·s this RFC attempts to address as clearly as possible and
+optionally give an example. Explain how the status quo is insufficient or not
+ideal.
+
+* Detail design
+
+Main part. The sections answers What are the tradeoffs of this proposal
+compared to status quo or potential alternatives? Explain details, corner
+cases, provide examples. Explain it so that someone familiar can understand.
+
+It is best to exemplify, contrived example too. If the Motivation section
+describes something that is hard to do without this proposal, this is a good
+place to show how easy that thing is to do with the proposal.
+
+** Backward compatibility
+
+# Christopher Baines:
+# I'm struggling to think of exactly how backwards compatibility would
+# apply to potential RFCs for Guix.
+
+Will your proposed change cause a behaviour change? Assess the expected
+impact on existing code on the following scale:
+
+0. No breakage
+1. Breakage only in extremely rare cases (exotic or unknown cases)
+2. Breakage in rare cases (user living in cutting-edge)
+3. Breakage in common cases
+
+Explain why the benefits of the change outweigh the costs of breakage.
+Describe the migration path. Consider specifying a compatibility warning for
+one or more releases. Give examples of error that will be reported for
+previously-working cases; do they make it easy for users to understand what
+needs to change and why?
+
+The aim is to explicitely consider beforehand potential Backward Compatibility
+issue.
+
+** Forward compatibility
+
+# Christopher Baines:
+# I do think it's worth explicitly bringing up something like the "cost of
+# reverting". That is, it's important to discuss things more if there's a
+# high cost to changing the approach later. For these "high cost of later
+# change" situations, the RFC process will probably be particularly
+# valuable.
+
+# Noé Lopez:
+# I think this section could apply very well to governance proposals.
+
+How will your proposed change evolve with time? What is the cost of changing
+the approach later?
+
+* Unresolved questions
+
+Explicitly list any remaining issues. At submitting time, be upfront and
+trust that the community will help. At reviewing time, this section tracks
+the details about the status of the process.
+
+At the end of the process, this section will be empty. If not, please be
+explicit with the known issues by adding a dedicated subsection under Detail
+design.
diff --git a/rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt b/rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..52d851f879
--- /dev/null
+++ b/rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,248 @@
+# -*- mode:org -*-
+#+TITLE: Request-For-Comment process
+#+DATE: 2023-10-31
+
++ Issue: 66844
++ Status: pending
++ Supporter: Simon Tournier
++ Co-supporters: Noé Lopez
+
+* Summary
+
+The "RFC" (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent
+and structured path for major changes and features to enter the Guix project,
+so that all stakeholders can make decisions collectively and be confident
+about the direction it is evolving in.
+
+* Motivation
+
+The current way that we add new features to Guix has been good for early
+development, but it is starting to show its limits as Guix becomes a broadly
+used system with many contributors. Changes might be slowed down by the lack
+of structure to acquire consensus, lack of a central place to consult
+contributors and users, and lack of clear deadlines. This is a proposal for a
+more principled RFC process to make it a more integral part of the overall
+development process, and one that is followed consistently to introduce
+substantial features.
+
+There are a number of changes that are significant enough that they could
+benefit from wider community consensus before being introduced. Either
+because they introduce new concepts, big changes or are controversial enough
+that not everybody will consent on the direction to take.
+
+Therefore, the purpose of this RFC is to introduce a process that allows to
+bring the discussion upfront and strengthen decisions. This RFC is used to
+bootstrap the process and further RFCs can be used to refine the process.
+
+It covers significant changes, where “significant” means any change that could
+only be reverted at a high cost, or any change with the potential to disrupt
+user scripts and programs or user workflows. Examples include:
+
+ - changing the <package> record type and/or its interfaces;
+ - adding or removing a ‘guix’ sub-command;
+ - changing the channel mechanism;
+ - changing project policy such as teams, decision-making, the
+ deprecation policy or this very document;
+ - changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure
+ (mailing lists, source code repository and forge, continuous
+ integration, etc.)
+
+For concrete past examples where this RFC process would be helpful:
+
+ - Removing input labels from package definitions, #49169
+ - Add 'guix shell' to subsume 'guix environment', #50960
+ + Trustable "guix pull", #22883
+ + Add "Deprecation Policy", #72840
+ + Collaboration via team and branch-features, several places over all the
+ mailing lists.
+
+* Detailed Design
+
+** When To Follow This Trocess
+
+This process is followed when one intends to make "substantial" changes to the
+Guix project. What constitutes a "substantial" change is evolving based on
+community norms, but may include the following.
+
+ + Changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
+ + Command-line interfaces
+ + Core Scheme interfaces
+ + Big restructuring of packages
+ + Hard to revert changes
+ + Governance and changes to the way we collaborate
+
+Certain changes do not require an RFC:
+
+ - Adding, updating packages, removing outdated packages
+ - Fixing security updates and bugs that don't break interfaces
+
+For general day-to-day contributions, please follow the regular process as
+described by manual sections "Submitting Patches", "Reviewing the Work of
+Others", "Teams" and "Making Decisions".
+
+A patch submission that contains any of the aforementioned substantial changes
+may be asked to first submit a RFC.
+
+** How the process works
+
+ 1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git
+ 2. Copy rfc/0000-template.org to rfc/00XY-good-name.org where good-name is
+ descriptive but not too long and XY increments
+ 3. Fill RFC
+ 4. Submit to guix-patches@HIDDEN
+ 5. Announce your RFC to guix-devel@HIDDEN
+
+Make sure the proposal is as well-written as you would expect the final
+version of it to be. It does not mean that all the subtilities must be
+considered at this point since that is the aim of review discussion. It means
+that the RFC process is not a prospective brainstorming and the proposal
+formalize an idea for making it happen.
+
+The submission of a proposal does not require an implementation. However, to
+improve the chance of a successful RFC, it is ecommended to have an idea for
+implementing it. If an implementation is attached to the detailed design, it
+might help the discussion.
+
+At this point, at least one other person must volunteer to be "co-supporter".
+The aim is to improve the chances that the RFC is both desired and likely to
+be implemented.
+
+Once supporter and co-supporter(s) are committed in the RFC process, the
+review discussion starts. Publicizing of the RFC on the project's mailing
+list named guix-devel is mandatory, and on other main communication channels
+is highly recommended.
+
+After a number of rounds of review, the discussion should settle and a general
+consensus should emerge. Please follow the "Decision Process" and "Timeline"
+sections.
+
+A successful RFC is not a rubber stamp, and in particular still does not mean
+the feature will ultimately be merged; it does mean that in principle all the
+participants have agreed to the feature and are amenable to merging it.
+
+An unsuccessful RFC is *not* a judgment on the value of the work, so a refusal
+should rather be interpreted as “let’s discuss again with a different angle”.
+The last state of an unsuccessful RFC is archived under the directory
+rfc/withdrawn/.
+
+** Co-supporter
+
+A co-supporter is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project’s
+practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a contributor
+with commit access. The co-supporter helps the supporter, they are both
+charged with keeping the proposal moving through the process. The
+co-supporter role is to help the proposal supporter by being the timekeeper
+and helps in pushing forward until process completion.
+
+The co-supporter doesn't necessarily have to agree with all the points of the
+RFC but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions are a good
+thing for the community.
+
+** Timeline
+
+The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following recommended periods:
+
+ submission (7d) ⟶ comments (30–60d) ⟶ last call (14d) ⟶ withdrawn OR final
+
+The author may withdraw their RFC proposal at any time; and it might be
+submitted again.
+
+*** Submission (up to 7 days)
+
+The author submits their RFC proposal as a regular patch and look for
+co-supporter(s). See 'Co-supporter' section.
+
+Once the RFC is co-supported, it marks the start of a discussion period.
+
+*** Comment (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
+
+The comment period starts once the author publishes their RFC to guix-devel,
+then the proposal is freely discussed for a period of at least 30 days. It is
+up to the supporter and co-supporter(s) to ensure that sufficient discussion
+is solicited. Please make sure that all have the time and space for
+expressing their comments. The proposal is about significant changes, thus
+more opinions is better than less.
+
+The author is encouraged to publish updated versions of their RFC at any point
+during the discussion period.
+
+Once the discussion goes stale or after 60 days, the author must summarize the
+state of the conversation and keep the final version.
+
+It moves to the last call period.
+
+*** Last call (up to 14 days)
+
+The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a last grace period of 14
+days is granted. People are asked to agree or disagree by commenting:
+
+ - +1 / LGTM: I support
+ - =0 / LGTM: I will live with it
+ - -1: I disagree with this proposal
+
+At least half of people with commit acces must express their voice with the
+keys above during this last call. We need to be sure that the RFC had been
+read by people committed to take care of the project, since it proposes an
+important change.
+
+When a positive consensus is reached, the RFC becomes effective. If not, the
+proposal is archived and the statu quo continues.
+
+
+** Decision Making: consensus
+
+It is expected from all contributors, and even more so from committers, to
+help build consensus and make decisions based on consensus. By using
+consensus, we are committed to finding solutions that everyone can live with.
+
+It implies that no decision is made against significant concerns and these
+concerns are actively resolved with proposals that work for everyone. A
+contributor, without or with commit access, wishing to block a proposal bears
+a special responsibility for finding alternatives, proposing ideas/code or
+explaining the rationale for the status quo.
+
+To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer
+details, you are encouraged to read
+<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>.
+
+** Merging the outcome
+
+Once a consesus is made, a committer should do the following to merge the RFC:
+
+ 1. Fill in the remaining metadata in the RFC header, including links for the
+ original Debbugs submission.
+ 2. Commit everything.
+ 3. Announce the establishment of the RFC to all.
+
+** Template of RFC
+
+The structure of the RFC is captured by the template; see the file
+rfc/0000-template.txt. Please use Markdown as markup language.
+
+** Backward Compatibility
+
+None.
+
+** Forward compatibility
+
+The RFC process can be refined by further RFCs.
+
+** Drawbacks
+
+There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more than
+it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help
+contribution, not an end in itself.
+
+Of course, group decision-making processes are difficult to manage.
+
+The ease of commenting may bring a slightly diminished signal-to-noise ratio
+in collected feedback, particularly on easily bike-shedded topics.
+
+** Open questions
+
+There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process. While
+we want to ensure that changes which affect the users are well-considered, we
+certainly don't want the process to become unduly burdensome. This is a
+careful balance which will require care to maintain moving forward.
+
+* Unresolved questions
base-commit: 93e1586116f39a30ba1fcb67bd839a43533dfaf4
--
2.45.2
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Dec 2024 18:14:50 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 12 13:14:50 2024
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40246 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tLni5-0000Dg-4n
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 13:14:50 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54066)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <ludo@HIDDEN>) id 1tLni2-0000DD-66
for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 13:14:47 -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 1tLnhv-0003zC-GD; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 13:14:39 -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:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:
From; bh=XOgxHcln9PfstL14n6W/fjHXZCivNSP2hV3wWx8ASuI=; b=hnmMniRubgW7roevVKhE
FkRz4uPpKMnbqjNTFa2AI8HNksH6r4pwrNxS3/HRo2RawbM4zQG/aOfNQtxWXxSF28bscmllZi4+9
HtH5e0lrGC1Xl3odzI6jaXWdW9ONBIm1lovellQCwaC6x0RFF9Tv7ThpOzGEw0hRfHQRJWQfKXH9d
HjXjX34p89faXvm3nwHpRIuhdwAHoYnIRCr2La80LbPxMXqpq1WtV5s3N1RZkXXu12UYyBazp2z09
BX56Gk6Bz/Z0VQ0PBp/1u927zS4Gx8VXEST546BqDadIXMymsQCVW1gf11mroy0ovlWCN+9vABout
0Qm8Sr79vYTLyA==;
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN>
To: =?utf-8?Q?No=C3=A9?= Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#74736: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
In-Reply-To: <09ff9f31af0575ba5223bf713f166101e79b8d99.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
(=?utf-8?Q?=22No=C3=A9?= Lopez"'s message of "Sun, 8 Dec 2024 13:31:43
+0100")
References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
<09ff9f31af0575ba5223bf713f166101e79b8d99.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:14:31 +0100
Message-ID: <875xno7oqg.fsf_-_@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
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: 74736
Cc: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@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 No=C3=A9,
Thanks a lot for resuming this work! That=E2=80=99s the right thing to do.
Leaving out 000-rfc-template.txt for now.
No=C3=A9 Lopez <noe@no=C3=A9.eu> skribis:
> +++ b/rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,232 @@
> +# -*- mode:org -*-
> +#+TITLE: Request-For-Comment process
> +#+DATE: 2023-10-31
[...]
> +* Motivation
> +
> +The current way that we add new features to Guix has been good for early
> +development, but it is starting to show its limits as Guix becomes a bro=
adly
> +used system with many contributors. Changes might be slowed down by the=
lack
> +of structure to acquire consensus.
=E2=80=9C=E2=80=A6 to achieve consensus, lack of a central place to consult=
contributors
and users, and lack of clear deadlines.=E2=80=9D
> +Note that this process does not cover most of the changes. It covers
> +significant changes, for some examples:
=E2=80=9CIt covers proposals significant changes, where =E2=80=9Csignifican=
t=E2=80=9D means any
change that could only be reverted at a high cost, or any change with
the potential to disrupt user scripts and programs or user workflows.
Examples include: =E2=80=9D
> + + change of inputs style
> + (Removing input labels from package definitions, #49169)
> + + introduction of =3Dguix shell=3D and deprecation of =3Dguix environme=
nt=3D
> + (Add 'guix shell' to subsume 'guix environment', #50960)
> + + introduction of authentication mechanism (Trustable "guix pull", #228=
83)
> + + changes in policy (Add "Deprecation Policy", #72840)
> + + collaboration via team and branch-features
> + (several places mailing list guix-devel)
These are changes from the past that may long be forgotten by the time
we read them. Perhaps we can abstract it a bit, like:
- changing the <package> record type and/or its interfaces;
- adding or removing a =E2=80=98guix=E2=80=99 sub-command;
- changing the channel mechanism;
- changing project policy such as teams, decision-making, the
deprecation policy or this very document;
- changing the contributor workflow and related infrastructure
(mailing lists, source code repository and forge, continuous
integration, etc.)
This list seems redundant with and similar to that under =E2=80=9CWhen To F=
ollow
This Process=E2=80=9D; maybe just keep it in one place, under =E2=80=9CWhen=
To Follow=E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D?
> +* Detail design
=E2=80=9CDetailed Design=E2=80=9D
> +** When you need to follow this process
=E2=80=9CWhen To Follow This Process=E2=80=9D
> +This process is followed when one intends to make "substantial" changes =
to the
> +Guix project. What constitutes a "substantial" change is evolving based=
on
> +community norms, but may include the following.
> +
> + + Changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on
> + + Command-line interfaces
> + + Core Scheme interfaces
> + + Big restructuring of packages
> + + Hard to revert changes
> + + Governance and changes to the way we collaborate
> +
> +Certain changes do not require an RFC:
> +
> + - Adding, updating packages, removing outdated packages
> + - Fixing security updates and bugs that don't break interfaces
I would add =E2=80=9CGeneral day-to-day contributions follow the regular
[decision-making process] and [team organization].=E2=80=9D, with reference=
s to
the relevant sections of the manual.
> +A patch submission to Debbugs that contains any of the afore-mentioned
Typo: =E2=80=9Caforementioned=E2=80=9D.
I would remove =E2=80=9Cto Debbugs=E2=80=9D to keep it more general and fut=
ure-proof.
> +** How the process works
> +
> + 1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git
I would suggest a separate repo.
> + 2. Copy rfc/0000-template.org to rfc/00XY-good-name.org where good-nam=
e is
> + descriptive but not too long and XY increments
> + 3. Fill RFC
> + 4. Submit to guix-patches@HIDDEN
> + 5. Announce your RFC to guix-devel@HIDDEN
> +
> +Make sure the proposal is as well-written as you would expect the final
> +version of it to be. It does not mean that all the subtilities must be
> +considered at this point since that is the aim of review discussion. It=
means
> +that the RFC process is not a prospective brainstorming and the proposal
> +formalize an idea for making it happen.
> +
> +The submission of a proposal does not require an implementation. Howeve=
r, to
> +improve the chance of a successful RFC, it might be recommended to have =
an
s/it might be/it is/
> +Once supporter and co-supporter(s) are committed in the RFC process, the
> +review discussion starts. Advertisement of the RFC on the mailing-lists
> +guix-devel is mandatory and IRC and other Guix communities are recommend=
ed.
=E2=80=9CPublicizing of the RFC on the project=E2=80=99s main communication=
channels is
mandatory.=E2=80=9D
> +After a number of rounds of review, the discussion should settle and a g=
eneral
> +consensus should emerge. If the RFC is successful then authors may cont=
ribute
> +to the implementation. This bit is left intentionally vague and should =
be
> +refined in the future.
I=E2=80=99d drop it or write =E2=80=9CSee the =E2=80=98Decision Process and=
Timeline=E2=80=99 section
below.=E2=80=9D
> +A successful RFC is not a rubber stamp, and in particular still does not=
mean
> +the feature will ultimately be merged; it does mean that in principle al=
l the
> +major stakeholders have agreed to the feature and are amenable to mergin=
g it.
I=E2=80=99d write =E2=80=9Call the participants=E2=80=9D instead of =E2=80=
=9Call the major
stakeholders=E2=80=9D.
> +The Guix projects ensures that a team of co-supporters =E2=80=93 the RFC=
team =E2=80=93 remain
> +available for any new RFCs that don=E2=80=99t find any co-supporters. T=
his team
> +should be added to the etc/teams.scm file.
I would drop that.
> +** Timeline
> +
> +The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following periods:
> + submission (7d) =E2=9F=B6 comments (30=E2=80=9360d) =E2=9F=B6 last cal=
l (14d) =E2=9F=B6 withdrawn OR final
Let=E2=80=99s borrow from the state transition diagram from at
<https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-process.html>, for clarity.
Perhaps we should also shorten the text of each section below.
In each section heading, I would add its duration:
*** Submission (up to 7 days)
=E2=80=A6
*** Discussion (at least 30 days, up to 60 days)
=E2=80=A6
> +*** Comment
> +
> +The author publishes their RFC to guix-devel and starts a discussion per=
iod of
=E2=80=9CThe author publicizes their RFC, marking the start of a discussion
period of at least 30 days and at most 60 days.=E2=80=9D
> +*** Last call
> +
> +The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a 14 day period is g=
iven
> +for people to express their agreement or disagreement. If a positive
> +consensus is reached the RFC becomes final and the changes should be app=
lied
=E2=80=9CIf consensus is reached, the RFC becomes =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D
> +in less than six months.
I=E2=80=99m not sure what =E2=80=9Cthe changes=E2=80=9D refers to.
Regarding consensus, I would add a link to the =E2=80=9CMaking Decisions=E2=
=80=9D
section of the manual=E2=80=A6
> +** Decision making: consensus
=E2=80=A6 and drop this.
> +** Merging the outcome
> +
> +Once a consesus is made, a committer should do the following to merge th=
e RFC:
> +
> + 1. Fill in the remaining metadata in the RFC header, including links fo=
r the
> + original Debbugs submission.
> + 2. Commit everything.
> + 3. Announce the establishment of the RFC to all the stakeholders.
> + 4. Ensure the RFC is applied within six months.
Maybe we should define the role of =E2=80=9CRFC editors=E2=80=9D (or =E2=80=
=9CRFC team=E2=80=9D?), which
would be the people responsible for doing those changes.
> +** Template of RFC
> +
> +# Ludovic Court=C3=A8s:
> +# I=E2=80=99d go for one format, preferably Markdown because we have a l=
ibrary to
> +# parse it.
Yes! :-) Despite being an Org fan, I think we should stick to Markdown:
it=E2=80=99s widespread, well-known, and can be rendered by Haunt or by any
forge.
> +** Backward Compatibility
> +
> +None.
> +
> +** Forward compatibility
I=E2=80=99m not sure what=E2=80=99s expected in these sections. Maybe =E2=
=80=9CCompatibility
Considerations=E2=80=9D would be more appropriate?
> +** Drawbacks
> +
> +There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution mor=
e than
> +it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to h=
elp
> +contribution, not an end in itself.
> +
> +Of course, group decision-making processes are difficult to manage.
> +
> +The ease of commenting may bring a slightly diminished signal-to-noise r=
atio
> +in collected feedback, particularly on easily bike-shedded topics.
> +
> +** Open questions
> +
> +There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process. W=
hile
> +we want to ensure that changes which affect the users are well-considere=
d, we
> +certainly don't want the process to become unduly burdensome. This is a
> +careful balance which will require care to maintain moving forward.
> +
> +* Unresolved questions
I think these two sections in the context of this foundational document
look a bit ridiculous. :-) But maybe that=E2=80=99s okay?
Thanks!
Ludo=E2=80=99.
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Ludovic Courtès <ludo@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Ludovic Courtès <ludo@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Dec 2024 20:48:39 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Dec 09 15:48:39 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55884 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tKkgJ-0005ls-6P for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2024 15:48:39 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-f46.google.com ([209.85.167.46]:40613) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN>) id 1tKkgG-0005lW-5N for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2024 15:48:38 -0500 Received: by mail-lf1-f46.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-53e395932c6so261465e87.2 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 09 Dec 2024 12:48:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1733777250; x=1734382050; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:subject:to:from:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=4UgzKIl2nW8XQdEcT1ITVX3VLVL6nJehb0DGUFM8u8I=; b=OcfrpyEEKGUCtYqFV5FYFIvuw50aQxbb78xhglbERdd3aR9y7ZJd1KiONgvyy3UCxa ZUuCQ5B28H9iW2S+AsQW5UDbSbHvr9jph4+YfUFhihhIYUDkLp1BrAUtcJNQaSaT3M8r AfW/nu+upzB/tMSdB6S2LkQCIhFWWOGYoSIjcIRtBQLETnn9IPGSAtiwMI3TmIQAtM7x Uh8ZSPK2UUeoaEAv/AOx19HTGVHeWJs3UR+s2d6RGqDqz+bXI5nqJvU57Blx9FQnT0J0 TSDswdQfuyGXgpPsYk3KbCl53AwRHXLKizsebqvN0Qqrqmxe8E2VWxIriXdM70mIanmE ZiiA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1733777250; x=1734382050; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:subject:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=4UgzKIl2nW8XQdEcT1ITVX3VLVL6nJehb0DGUFM8u8I=; b=U3mPf4DkaP8Z32j9kF9MUW3YOw4z3MLxud0RjgaTCUE/SKdegGR01k67ui4tVKGqww MFCZmJIWZx/ibECi+8+afjm/bDIlaLlG4TGaPY7ifVL1uIPC+8EVx/AfxnBcPxvMntam qN9vPm9CUh9tnKJEHQ166MVHJT/PEy9d1sN2L7gWv3AiucY1EqBAxnkuOUbemvtH8Jk0 cEJXMsv3IOQ2AiSpwWw4LifNL/+Vszut7s+oU8T6nDdyLR+7DW2fUWwSloH66saf139x qpAeiNBKBGJgk8Wbhe7yq7jdeKPMjwl68O4elcwPmPHtNSpoogscB6aQoxu+yVjt8ZKr Jc5g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx+PCbnp9Q/RfggYWaxzNVbsAYJhLNNYwiZerlAwjUv1tOK/+W0 q6Q2kU3mtFF0ynNMZtPcT1+mNZyXseSARPOvgucB9wTgovjMykpqHi+arrn78ZY= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvmc51rvY6OJtB/eaaTbhwdKm423Q4Li6v4h2+WJszeFuRikG3ZXWCbuB8uhZE RVK8OO4/SOs6KKNFxpPXDs8YXqDwegnN0uwGsrSwmSM8Qq73N2IG1ewwsab66qzCXVr0GwSF5y/ IwJ6X6GChNz9zzMsc4wSuiQsf7NqTxBDYtXCAumbYCg9K3DCzfopWp/w6ffyHGpXQZGUFHDuiKk 57EIq9KrtzE9Fhy/6lk5G3edA0UkxSzpJp3qKxqoaGNup8HHTvEZA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEEBOwNysL8n/p3PWZk4P0Mpl6Faln4kSEZbf1XYt/5kKU0Sl5M0RQd/QJttU1NUPHcoyR3Kg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1141:b0:300:1f12:2fc6 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-30231933c5amr1090651fa.5.1733777249840; Mon, 09 Dec 2024 12:47:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from elephant ([95.79.11.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 38308e7fff4ca-30221998b34sm4359391fa.79.2024.12.09.12.47.27 for <74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 09 Dec 2024 12:47:28 -0800 (PST) From: "Artyom V. Poptsov" <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2024 23:47:18 +0300 Message-ID: <87h67c60tl.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) 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: 74736 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 Hello No=C3=A9 Lopez, thanks for pushing this idea forward! I think that the RFC process will help to track all the major initiatives in GNU Guix -- present and future ones. I know that there are several long-term big projects inside Guix, namely Guile daemon, distributed substitutes and maybe more. In my view the problem is that the information about those projects is buried in the Git branches and E-Mail discussions. Maybe RFCs in the well-known place inside the repository will help developers to see what the community at large is up to. > # Ludovic Court=C3=A8s: > # I=E2=80=99d go for one format, preferably Markdown because we have a li= brary to > # parse it. To my taste, as for Emacs user, the plain old org-mode format is good enough to write RFCs, but that's no more than a preference. Many people using Markdown nowadays so maybe it will help to make the RFC process more friendly for newcomers. =2D avp =2D-=20 Artyom "avp" Poptsov <poptsov.artyom@HIDDEN> Home page: https://memory-heap.org/~avp/ CADR Hackerspace co-founder: https://cadrspace.ru/ GPG: D0C2 EAC1 3310 822D 98DE B57C E9C5 A2D9 0898 A02F --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJNBAEBCgA3FiEEAf2F9Bp7f4IFgwalk16+BzbchX4FAmdXV1sZHHBvcHRzb3Yu YXJ0eW9tQGdtYWlsLmNvbQAKCRCTXr4HNtyFfkqkEACN73x8y/Tg4/BuyD1O+Eq+ WSDxUQKdZKBjcHiB+XGaHhXVyt7QlmniFrBIKU2SAGdIJUfneJePfS8dZqMyrPBQ r1bGsq9QJCPm3fb1fxJubUiiBeMkYctzcHnjNBCENP9K27YBxNosQopKO3U2rXFc uaTu5qVg8jBYncqAnxqjJf7QePHwm5hKhwNQuWvQet0hxUimP1ldBXRJla98dIXP c6AiwUuUePl0KSLPcdjaTukzJqtBPv3bPRjov+4oR2Vd/RHewjjJ6C4A+r1RzKYa wY8Yk8SR4/su5wG0wVugocE+Ks/7+JPK1jl2yZLMBM/I2KSfq3XkqIG55PqyzIC4 NAJDG8nUzV0Yoy8cZINJepIBI2fcPJdyQP5jCIDDkPOK8gaCVIxC9bUftuBXuwsw 73VBD7txNP4vWZ++ic/+yvI4SXMdOfWVxT2ABzvnsu8hRlqBz4aRs5JkywmtTtL6 ww8quAyGeFFI0nC/heH5CnOEgN+1iS+RnzIt6UlecdZU515CYanZ7ZcAOFdP70dU FVWic3DkudSkoeuuV/bxGolfR1yZ8k2o5I18vCA6fuOUUdewMqg1rIDhMB92qWXj uIZkZqXfghsOncWuUm8wQWxwJTWoR6LzNF/ugLR18nHjvJSMKiDvU3DYM44K7z7I 4cO9UrcpJkUZYMvh8irxxg== =/WsE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at 74736) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Dec 2024 12:33:09 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Dec 08 07:33:09 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49940 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tKGTE-0006nx-CP for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2024 07:33:09 -0500 Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([194.63.252.55]:37983) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tKGTB-0006nG-My for 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2024 07:33:06 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:From: Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=muTZR5F98QIptrUDIUIpa0Jddp88XqhNSmZiaNUXYes=; b=A LoUXHFGkmLSncQMrAeakZS/Reb0ab5Z+txjfq5+YzdtEbOaAZGRrEmZFxsntM96WqBNGZ2L+kPk3R Ft9FeLFHq4hgCGU0aVttKfvk+ysIf0Hhf/lm/YjfeMhtohqqJtusbccoFJO3rbm/52eq69NBMNfx4 j6Hvv8m40JMaXCVVXXuYX72bhIor8jIWM2B7Lxe34HxHffLVsRQ5hM/xoWEW9ObWKHNlZ+pH0Ygn4 JdwLXw92RRI0YVVeiO+kGb1Xnfd2NrSMIn7rzJzhhdB6ZpF0Ty4n5olIuV/XcSITZJkPRqONTlcLB Odi4TlJJSG7s2dZSHvnA+N+dguIXT81SA==; Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1tKGQx-000bYj-2r; Sun, 08 Dec 2024 13:30:47 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN> To: 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: [PATCH v2 1/1] rfc: Add Request-For-Comment process. Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2024 13:31:43 +0100 Message-ID: <09ff9f31af0575ba5223bf713f166101e79b8d99.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> References: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Debbugs-Cc: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@HIDDEN> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 74736 Cc: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noe@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 (-) From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN> * rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt: New file. * rfc/0000-template.txt: New file. Co-authored-by: Noé Lopez <noe@HIDDEN> Change-Id: Ide88e70dc785ab954ccb42fb043625db12191208 --- rfc/0000-template.txt | 76 +++++++++++++ rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt | 232 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 308 insertions(+) create mode 100644 rfc/0000-template.txt create mode 100644 rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt diff --git a/rfc/0000-template.txt b/rfc/0000-template.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..8c4077e753 --- /dev/null +++ b/rfc/0000-template.txt @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ +# -*- mode:org -*- +#+TITLE: <The meaningful name of the proposal> +#+DATE: <date when the process starts> + ++ Issue: <number assigned by Debbugs> ++ Status: <pending|done|unsuccessful|deprecated> ++ Supporter: <Your Name> ++ Co-supporter(s): <Some> <Names> + +* Summary + +A one-paragraph explanation. Main sales pitch. + +* Motivation + +Describe the problem·s this RFC attempts to address as clearly as possible and +optionally give an example. Explain how the status quo is insufficient or not +ideal. + +* Detail design + +Main part. The sections answers What are the tradeoffs of this proposal +compared to status quo or potential alternatives? Explain details, corner +cases, provide examples. Explain it so that someone familiar can understand. + +It is best to exemplify, contrived example too. If the Motivation section +describes something that is hard to do without this proposal, this is a good +place to show how easy that thing is to do with the proposal. + +** Backward compatibility + +# Christopher Baines: +# I'm struggling to think of exactly how backwards compatibility would +# apply to potential RFCs for Guix. + +Will your proposed change cause a behaviour change? Assess the expected +impact on existing code on the following scale: + +0. No breakage +1. Breakage only in extremely rare cases (exotic or unknown cases) +2. Breakage in rare cases (user living in cutting-edge) +3. Breakage in common cases + +Explain why the benefits of the change outweigh the costs of breakage. +Describe the migration path. Consider specifying a compatibility warning for +one or more releases. Give examples of error that will be reported for +previously-working cases; do they make it easy for users to understand what +needs to change and why? + +The aim is to explicitely consider beforehand potential Backward Compatibility +issue. + +** Forward compatibility + +# Christopher Baines: +# I do think it's worth explicitly bringing up something like the "cost of +# reverting". That is, it's important to discuss things more if there's a +# high cost to changing the approach later. For these "high cost of later +# change" situations, the RFC process will probably be particularly +# valuable. + +# Noé Lopez: +# I think this section could apply very well to governance proposals. + +How will your proposed change evolve with time? What is the cost of changing +the approach later? + +* Unresolved questions + +Explicitly list any remaining issues. At submitting time, be upfront and +trust that the community will help. At reviewing time, this section tracks +the details about the status of the process. + +At the end of the process, this section will be empty. If not, please be +explicit with the known issues by adding a dedicated subsection under Detail +design. diff --git a/rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt b/rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..4282e84230 --- /dev/null +++ b/rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt @@ -0,0 +1,232 @@ +# -*- mode:org -*- +#+TITLE: Request-For-Comment process +#+DATE: 2023-10-31 + ++ Issue: 66844 ++ Status: pending ++ Supporter: Simon Tournier ++ Co-supporters: + +* Summary + +The "RFC" (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent +and structured path for major changes and features to enter the Guix project, +so that all stakeholders can make decisions collectively and be confident +about the direction it is evolving in. + +* Motivation + +The current way that we add new features to Guix has been good for early +development, but it is starting to show its limits as Guix becomes a broadly +used system with many contributors. Changes might be slowed down by the lack +of structure to acquire consensus. This is a proposal for a more principled +RFC process to make it a more integral part of the overall development +process, and one that is followed consistently to introduce substantial +features. + +There are a number of changes that are significant enough that they could +benefit from wider community consensus before being introduced. Either +because they introduce new concepts, big changes or are controversial enough +that not everybody will consent on the direction to take. + +Therefore, the purpose of this RFC is to introduce a process that allows to +bring the discussion upfront and strengthen decisions. This RFC is used to +bootstrap the process and further RFCs can be used to refine the process. + +Note that this process does not cover most of the changes. It covers +significant changes, for some examples: + + + change of inputs style + (Removing input labels from package definitions, #49169) + + introduction of =guix shell= and deprecation of =guix environment= + (Add 'guix shell' to subsume 'guix environment', #50960) + + introduction of authentication mechanism (Trustable "guix pull", #22883) + + changes in policy (Add "Deprecation Policy", #72840) + + collaboration via team and branch-features + (several places mailing list guix-devel) + +* Detail design + +** When you need to follow this process + +This process is followed when one intends to make "substantial" changes to the +Guix project. What constitutes a "substantial" change is evolving based on +community norms, but may include the following. + + + Changes that modify user-facing interfaces that may be relied on + + Command-line interfaces + + Core Scheme interfaces + + Big restructuring of packages + + Hard to revert changes + + Governance and changes to the way we collaborate + +Certain changes do not require an RFC: + + - Adding, updating packages, removing outdated packages + - Fixing security updates and bugs that don't break interfaces + +A patch submission to Debbugs that contains any of the afore-mentioned +substantial changes may be asked to first submit a RFC. + +** How the process works + + 1. Clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git + 2. Copy rfc/0000-template.org to rfc/00XY-good-name.org where good-name is + descriptive but not too long and XY increments + 3. Fill RFC + 4. Submit to guix-patches@HIDDEN + 5. Announce your RFC to guix-devel@HIDDEN + +Make sure the proposal is as well-written as you would expect the final +version of it to be. It does not mean that all the subtilities must be +considered at this point since that is the aim of review discussion. It means +that the RFC process is not a prospective brainstorming and the proposal +formalize an idea for making it happen. + +The submission of a proposal does not require an implementation. However, to +improve the chance of a successful RFC, it might be recommended to have an +idea for implementing it. If an implementation is attached to the detailed +design, it might help the discussion. + +At this point, at least one other person must volunteer to be "co-supporter". +The aim is to improve the chances that the RFC is both desired and likely to +be implemented. + +Once supporter and co-supporter(s) are committed in the RFC process, the +review discussion starts. Advertisement of the RFC on the mailing-lists +guix-devel is mandatory and IRC and other Guix communities are recommended. + +After a number of rounds of review, the discussion should settle and a general +consensus should emerge. If the RFC is successful then authors may contribute +to the implementation. This bit is left intentionally vague and should be +refined in the future. + +A successful RFC is not a rubber stamp, and in particular still does not mean +the feature will ultimately be merged; it does mean that in principle all the +major stakeholders have agreed to the feature and are amenable to merging it. + +An unsuccessful RFC is *not* a judgment on the value of the work, so a refusal +should rather be interpreted as “let’s discuss again with a different angle”. +The last state of an unsuccessful RFC is archived under the directory +rfc/withdrawn/. + +** Co-supporter + +A co-supporter is a contributor sufficiently familiar with the project’s +practices, hence it is recommended, but not mandatory, to be a contributor +with commit access. The co-supporter helps the supporter, they are both +charged with keeping the proposal moving through the process. The +co-supporter role is to help the proposal supporter by being the timekeeper +and helps in pushing forward until process completion. + +The co-supporter doesn't necessarily have to agree with all the points of the +RFC but should generally be satisfied that the proposed additions are a good +thing for the community. + +The Guix projects ensures that a team of co-supporters – the RFC team – remain +available for any new RFCs that don’t find any co-supporters. This team +should be added to the etc/teams.scm file. + +** Timeline + +The lifetime of an RFC is structured into the following periods: + submission (7d) ⟶ comments (30–60d) ⟶ last call (14d) ⟶ withdrawn OR final + +*** Submission + +The author submits their proposal to the patches mailing list and the RFC team +which will read the proposal and can advise the author on improving their RFC. +This first round of review is provided only to help the author and should not +reflect personal bias or opinions. + +If seven days have passed without answer or the author thinks that his +RFC is ready then he may move on to the comment period. + +*** Comment + +The author publishes their RFC to guix-devel and starts a discussion period of +at least 30 days. It is up to the supporter and co-supporter to ensure that +sufficient discussion is solicited. Make sure that all have the time for +expressing their comments. The proposal is about significant changes, thus +more time is better than less. + +The author is encouraged to publish updated versions of their RFC at any point +during the discussion period. + +Once the discussion goes stale or after 60 days, the author should publish or +keep their final version and move into the last call period. + +*** Last call + +The author publishes a final version of the RFC and a 14 day period is given +for people to express their agreement or disagreement. If a positive +consensus is reached the RFC becomes final and the changes should be applied +in less than six months. + +If no consensus can be reached or the changes were not applied in less than +six months, the RFC becomes withdrawn and is archived. The author may also +withdraw their RFC at any point. + +** Decision making: consensus + +It is expected from all contributors, and even more so from committers, to +help build consensus and make decisions based on consensus. By using +consensus, we are committed to finding solutions that everyone can live with. + +It implies that no decision is made against significant concerns and these +concerns are actively resolved with proposals that work for everyone. A +contributor, without or with commit access, wishing to block a proposal bears +a special responsibility for finding alternatives, proposing ideas/code or +explaining the rationale for the status quo. + +To learn what consensus decision making means and understand its finer +details, you are encouraged to read +<https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus>. + +** Merging the outcome + +Once a consesus is made, a committer should do the following to merge the RFC: + + 1. Fill in the remaining metadata in the RFC header, including links for the + original Debbugs submission. + 2. Commit everything. + 3. Announce the establishment of the RFC to all the stakeholders. + 4. Ensure the RFC is applied within six months. + +** Template of RFC + +# Ludovic Courtès: +# I’d go for one format, preferably Markdown because we have a library to +# parse it. + +The structure of the RFC is captured by the template; see the file +rfc/0000-template.txt. It is recommended to write using markup language as, +for example, Org-mode or Markdown or reStructuredText. + +** Backward Compatibility + +None. + +** Forward compatibility + +The RFC process can be refined by further RFCs. + +** Drawbacks + +There is a risk that the additional process will hinder contribution more than +it would help. We should stay alert that the process is only a way to help +contribution, not an end in itself. + +Of course, group decision-making processes are difficult to manage. + +The ease of commenting may bring a slightly diminished signal-to-noise ratio +in collected feedback, particularly on easily bike-shedded topics. + +** Open questions + +There are still questions regarding the desired scope of the process. While +we want to ensure that changes which affect the users are well-considered, we +certainly don't want the process to become unduly burdensome. This is a +careful balance which will require care to maintain moving forward. + +* Unresolved questions -- 2.46.0
zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Dec 2024 12:28:59 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sun Dec 08 07:28:59 2024 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49927 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tKGPC-0006Yf-Mz for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2024 07:28:58 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:33018) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tKGPB-0006YV-1g for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2024 07:28:58 -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 <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tKGPA-0001GS-Ja for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Sun, 08 Dec 2024 07:28:56 -0500 Received: from smtp.domeneshop.no ([2a01:5b40:0:3006::1]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <noe@HIDDEN>) id 1tKGP8-000767-Dy for guix-patches@HIDDEN; Sun, 08 Dec 2024 07:28:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xn--no-cja.eu; s=ds202402; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject: Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=aIppDwRFDxhXEpizIiCclEHEFbAUV1wdJKfC3f7jb1k=; b=X0Dw6mnMZyIBwYMLDmG60+bAtF E+W4OnBvXf56wxbC/m2qeRRaz0bjCG5l0pMZ/CtQoR1j1EDhZpNnBDHiNoY7JvtGIQNEz3n3//lMU lFpSeqCkVazjbNsSSrFU8WZciOGVvd0UDHgEXF5U/qMJmCres3i4I1GNe9t2D+ezkOg4QGtTy4vtQ h5abx1X2FaPCfcLseNKSCR5MXMeWuTvbPClLkRqZaXKjC3YnryCXEc8WpTirtMm9XlQGB1jhamA90 bphvi+rlnV5TcpRUnjXkvxHhj33xT/AxH/mMU9T4aJPWPu7nE7nNkfLNlisHY2QUSPhoDwa/MGGYS PMlLJcAw==; Received: from smtp by smtp.domeneshop.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1tKGOz-000b6N-Lu; Sun, 08 Dec 2024 13:28:45 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noe@HIDDEN> To: guix-patches@HIDDEN Subject: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process. Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2024 13:29:52 +0100 Message-ID: <cover.1733614983.git.noelopez@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Debbugs-Cc: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN>, Christopher Baines <mail@HIDDEN>, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@HIDDEN> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a01:5b40:0:3006::1; envelope-from=noe@HIDDEN; helo=smtp.domeneshop.no X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: =?UTF-8?q?No=C3=A9=20Lopez?= <noelopez@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: -2.3 (--) From: Noé Lopez <noelopez@HIDDEN> Hi, It has been more than a year since Simon Tournier’s original patch[1] for specifying a “request for comment” process. I believe that such a process can pave the way for big changes to make their way to Guix and the establishment of a governance model, among other things. Therefore, I have taken it upon myself to produce an updated version taking into account the comments received on the original patch and my own changes. These changes are targeted not only to committers, but to every contributor so that anyone can propose important changes. So anyone should feel free to comment what they think :) Have a good day, Noé Lopez [1] https://issues.guix.gnu.org/66844 Simon Tournier (1): rfc: Add Request-For-Comment process. rfc/0000-template.txt | 76 +++++++++++++ rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt | 232 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 308 insertions(+) create mode 100644 rfc/0000-template.txt create mode 100644 rfc/0001-rfc-process.txt base-commit: 1affd2b5aa7f5467a44cf757c4fc0c6956d3f3c9 -- 2.46.0
Noé Lopez <noe@HIDDEN>:zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, guix-patches@HIDDEN.
Full text available.zimon.toutoune@HIDDEN, mail@HIDDEN, ludo@HIDDEN, guix-patches@HIDDEN:bug#74736; Package guix-patches.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.