GNU bug report logs - #61894
[PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>, Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> lease-up.com>
Cc: guix-maintainers <at> gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>, 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, 宋文武 <iyzsong <at> envs.net>, Andreas Enge <andreas <at> enge.fr>, guix-devel <at> gnu.org
Subject: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2023 12:14:52 +0100

Hi,

On Sat, 11 Mar 2023 at 21:33, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> It may help to shed a bit of light on the original reason I think this
> change came into existence, and in the interest of transparency and
> hopefully improving or finding alternatives to the proposed change, I
> consent to Ludovic openly discussing it, even if it involves a healthy
> dose of critique and looking inward.

There is no one original reason but several diffuse situations.  Well, I
have tried to provide the context and the intent behind the patch in
this message here:

    https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-03/msg00121.html

Although I agree that the wording of the initial Ludo’s proposal is not
the one I would like, it does not appear to me so crazy to ask another
LGTM for some part of the code.

Double-check leaf Python package is not worth and it adds a lot of
unnecessary burden.  We all agree here, I guess.

Double-check core packages or Guile build-side code sounds to me totally
reasonable.

The initial wording of the proposal,

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
+When your patch falls under the area of expertise of a team
+(@pxref{Teams}), you need the explicit approval of at least one team
+member before committing (another team member if you are on the team).
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

cannot apply for all the teams.  Again, we all agree I guess.

However, this proposal appears to me totally sane for what is under the
scope of the team named ’core’ for instance.

Instead of a strong opposition, the patch needs an update.


Cheers,
simon

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.