On 2025-05-05, Leo Famulari wrote: > On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 06:12:25PM -0700, Felix Lechner via Development of > GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution. wrote: >> [...] the other, but the standard for approval seems high. > > Yes, the standard could not be higher, but this is a consensus process, > not a democratic process. By definition, the choice must be unanimous.
Consensus does not require unanimous approval, only the lack of strong dissent, though *ideally* with strong and broad approval. Technically, it could be any mix of people declaring "I support" and "I accept" as long as nobody declared "I disapprove". In general it might be a red flag if it is overwhelmingly "I accept" vs. "I support" and that should be considered during the implementation phase (presuming no "I disapprove" declarations). My take is that it depends on the stakes weather strong approval is important; something that heavily impacts many people to a large degree might really need very strong approval, whereas relatively minor impacts where someone is providing the enthusiasm and work to implement might skirt by with general acceptance. I declared "I accept" because while I saw merit in it moving forward, I did recognize some unresolved issues raised by others. Some people did declare "I disapprove" in this case, so the decision did not pass muster, at least for now... > I also shared some aspects of my experience making decisions this way: > > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/76407#30 > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/76407#41 Thanks for those! I will admit I dropped off the discussion largely because my enthusiasm was sapped a bit, in addition to being technically hard to find a way to follow a threaded discussion on the bug report (once the mailing lists were (inconsistantly) dropped from the discussion)). live well, vagrant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
