Marc Haber <mh+debian-v...@zugschlus.de> writes: > The one we just had was tl;dr to me. The people pushing it gave me zero > motivation to read it, I spent my spare time on my packages.
As the person proposing this GR, I think that's a perfectly reasonable stance to take, and to be quite honest one of my goals was to *not* give people a (negative) motivation to feel like they have to be involved. My explicit goal (with one exception mentioned below) was to address various process bugs in a straightforward way consistent with how we've been informally behaving anyway. My hope was that the result would be quite boring, and unless you're directly involved in a GR, hopefully no one will notice. The exception is the change to the maximum discussion length, as previously discussed, which is a real, substantive change. However, not everyone is going to have a strong feeling about that one way or the other. I for one will be watching closely to see if the new maximum discussion length causes problems in practice, since I understand the basis for Wouter's concern, and if it seems like it's causing significant issues, consider proposing another GR to fix it. But we'll need to go through a few GRs first to see how it goes. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
