Maxim Cournoyer <[email protected]> writes: > At least I chose to stay silent but shared serious concerns about > this GCD, and I believe there *was* constructive comments from those > critical of it, not just mine here [0], but from others as well, that > had yet to be taken into account into in the final GCD. > > [0] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2026-05/msg00403.html > > About the request for more time to firm up this GCD that is dismissed by > some, I don't think it's unreasonable, given the GCD author had to cut > it a bit short (and I had too, probably others) with a leave in the summer, > putting even more time pressure than the GCD process itself does on this > difficult process. I had suggested by then to pause (withdraw) the GCD > and continue its discussion in September [1]. > > [1] https://yhetil.org/guix-devel/[email protected]/
That's not the point Janneke is making, is it? You are speaking about your messages, Janneke points out that a member didn't give the required constructive comments for being elegible for disapproving. If you did have enough reasons to disapprove, you should have done so. But that's not what's being discussed here, the actions of one member are independent of others. I'm not saying that Gabriel's disapproval should *not* be counted, what I'm saying is that if you have to make the case that it *should* be counted, you should focus on displaying the constructive comments that the individual in question made, not your own. I've requested Gabriel in this mail[1] to clarify that, he doesn't need to be the one responding to settle the matter, if you are aware of those constructive comments that Gabriel did, just reference them so there is no confusion. And since it seems that there is some people that would consider disapproving if Gabriel hadn't done so first; if his disapproval where to be nullified, it would only be fair to let this people disapprove. It's clear that we have a problem with the governance system if people need to vote thinking about what others vote. I've noticed from previous GCDs, that one strategy to limits ones own exposure to criticism, is to wait until there is one disapproval so there is no longer need for you to vote something controversial. [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2026-07/msg00314.html Best regards, -- Sergio
