Hi Ludo, On Tue, 09 Nov 2021 at 17:52, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote: > zimoun <zimon.touto...@gmail.com> skribis:
>> However, as I said elsewhere, this effort should start be collecting >> what do we consider as changes requiring formal process? > > Agreed, that’s what I meant above. I meant, based on changed already merged. For instance, on the top of my head, some changes that *I* consider requiring a RFC: - new inputs style - guix shell - authentication - GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH (not finished and not documented) And it would be nice if we could come with a list of such changes. It would help for finding patterns – if they are :-) – for examples, numbers of people involved in the discussion, time between each reply, structure of the cover letters, etc. > I don’t have an answer, but I think we should look at what others are > doing, what criteria they use, etc. The Nix RFC process is probably the > closest match in terms of application domain, but maybe others are > closer to the way we practice decision-making in Guix. Yeah, for sure, several items need definitions. ;-) - which kind of change requires a RFC? - what is the process? - how to decide? Accept or reject? - who decide? - etc. Cheers, simon
