Hello all, thank you for moving this forward! May I suggest to keep guix-devel posted when sending comments to the bug?
I like Arun's suggestion of having a separate mailing list for discussing these important changes (GCD? Greatest common divisors!) in the future instead of guix-devel. Janneke, I think another motivation for such a process is to make sure that some decision is actually reached in the end, instead of letting discussions taper out. I feel that this tends to happen in Guix and Guix Foundation. Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists on disapproving? (I am reminded of the European Union where one member state can effectively hold the others hostage over certain issues.) The RFC/GCD says: "A team member sending this reply should have made constructive comments during the discussion period." What if they have not? How about adding a quorum of "disapprove" votes to have effect? (Actually in Europe *two* member states are needed for a veto in the Council.) Notice also that the suggestion bootstraps the team members into a decision taking body - so far we have added people more or less randomly to teams. For instance, team members need not have commit rights and thus be vetted by three fellow committers. So should we replace "team members" by "committers"? Or keep the proposal as is and immediately work on a new GCD to somehow safeguard the addition of people to a team? Andreas
