On 2026-05-29, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Nguyễn Gia Phong <[email protected]> skribis:
>> On 2026-05-27 at 15:49+02:00, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>> Nguyễn Gia Phong skribis:
>>> > In practice it doesn't matter which school of thought one is in
>>> > for us to work together, but signing off this GCD as-is means
>>> > I have to subscribe to the former filosofi as a mean to my end
>>> > (the ban of LLM output in Guix) and I feel "manipulated".
>>>
>>> During deliberation, each one of us will say whether they support,
>>> accept, or disapprove the implementation of what the “Detailed Design”
>>> section proposes, and only that.
>>
>> Thanks for clearing that up!  Could GCD 1 be amended with that?
>
> GCD 1 reads:
>
>   - “I support”, meaning that one supports the proposal;
>   - “I accept”, meaning that one consents to the implementation of the
>     proposal;
>   - “I disapprove”, meaning that one opposes the implementation of the
>     proposal.  A team member sending this reply should have made constructive
>     comments during the discussion period.
>
> To me, “the proposal” is what’s under “Detailed Design”; the
> “Motivation” section is not a proposal in any sense of the word.
>
> Now, we could always prepare a GCD (!) to clarify this if people find it
> ambiguous, but of course it’s going to take a couple of months to land.

Ouch.

I find it a bit misleading to not treat the document in it's
entirety... even if technically the GCD process defines it in a narrow
scope... I feel it really breaks the spirit of consensus to present them
altogether as a whole and complete document, but only decide on a
portion of the document, and then record the whole and complete document
as the results.

Maybe this is a horrible analogy, but kind of feels like the disconnect
between a GFDL licensed work with invariant sections, front cover texts
and back cover tests. :)


live well,
  vagrant

p.s. Just now I noticed that "should" in the disapproval section is
really standing out to me as something to be replaced with a stronger
word in the future (e.g. "must")...

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

  • [nore...@codeberg... Pjotr Prins
    • Re: Submitti... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
      • Re: Subm... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
        • Re: ... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
          • ... Ludovic Courtès
            • ... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
              • ... Ludovic Courtès
                • ... Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
                • ... Greg Hogan
                • ... Ludovic Courtès
                • ... Vagrant Cascadian
                • ... Andreas Enge
                • ... Vagrant Cascadian
                • ... Andreas Enge
      • Re: Subm... Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli

Reply via email to