On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 1:02 PM Simon Tournier <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> On Fri, 15 May 2026 at 17:59, Greg Hogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In the linked conversation you say "Somehow, we already had this
> > discussion of team membership when discussing GCD 007".
> >
> > Could you link to this discussion and resolution in GCD 007?
>
> As I wrote in the cited message [1]:
>
>         GCD 007 proposes: “Teams are generally open for new members to
>         join, but current team members retain the authority over timing
>         and procedures when onboarding new members.”

The request was for a link to the discussion. The claim was that this
had been discussed.

> Please read subsection “Team membership” [2].
>
> And since this GCD 007 with the title “Teams, Special Teams and
> Memberships” had been under the Discussion Period for the whole 60 days,
> yes, I still think it’s correct to write: "Somehow, we already had this
> discussion of team membership when discussing GCD 007".
>
> You might disapprove the end result but this GCD proposed to clarify
> “team membership”, among other things.  Anyway.

Yes, clarified in the abstract, but with nothing concrete. Even the
thread that you replied to noted that "unfortunately
guix/guix-consensus-documents#11 [GCD 007] says little about this
either" [0]. Do you disagree that GCD 007 preserved the status quo?

[0] https://codeberg.org/guix/guix/pulls/8358#issuecomment-14708370

Reply via email to