Hello!

Gabriel Wicki <[email protected]> skribis:

> What a surpise of you, Andreas, to take the lead here.  Thank you!  I am
> not sure why you get the feeling that this GCD is stuck, though.

Sarcasm and confrontation are again uncalled for.

> IIUC we are not in a particular hurry, here, right?  The discussion
> period could be prolonged, or am I mistaken?

Discussion is at least 30 days and at most 60 days:

  https://consensus.guix.gnu.org/gcd/001-gcd-process.html

I think the discussion period officially started on Feb. 27 when a
sponsor was found:
<https://codeberg.org/guix/guix-consensus-documents/pulls/11#issuecomment-11059085>.

So it will end, at your option, between March 27 and April 27.

>  - Should we try to keep the current model of inheriting the Maintainer
>    role (maintainers appoint new ones)?  How would we adequately phrase
>    that?

The minimum change that I think would improve on the status quo is
fixed-term mandates (forcing rotation to happen after X months).

>  - Who can revoke someone else's team membership?  For what reason(s)?
>    How?

As currently documented (info "(guix) Teams"), it’s either when the
person quits or when they’ve been inactive for one year or more.

I think we should at least keep these two reasons (which are missing in
the current GCD007 draft), but perhaps we can add more.

>  - I guess we all agree that generally in our project decisions are made
>    by finding consensus.  Should we write that down for all the roles or
>    maybe as a general rule outside of the roles?

It’s already written:

  https://guix.gnu.org/manual/devel/en/html_node/Making-Decisions.html
  https://consensus.guix.gnu.org/gcd/001-gcd-process.html

These documents are “binding”.

>  - How is dissent resolved in each of the roles (teams, committers,
>    maintainers)?  Do we have, should we introduce and how do we write
>    down according procedures?
>
>    Examples being: differences among committers (which change is the
>    best), among team members, between teams, etc.

This is already documented as being addressed by seeking consensus and I
think it has worked well for almost 15 years (it’s not perfect: some
issues get ignored, too.)

HTH!

Ludo’.

Reply via email to