GNU bug report logs - #72839
[PATCH RFC] DRAFT doc: Add “Deprecation Policy” section.

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>

Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 19:15:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Merged with 72840

Done: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #17 received at 72839 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Matthew Trzcinski <matt <at> excalamus.com>, 72839 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>, 72840 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Florian Pelz <pelzflorian <at> pelzflorian.de>
Subject: Re: bug#72840: [PATCH RFC] DRAFT doc: Add “Deprecation Policy” section.
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 19:38:00 +0200
Hi Simon,

Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> skribis:

> …Well, I’m just aware of this only now – thanks mastodon!  Why only
> guix-patches and not guix-devel?  Or do I also missed it?

My bad; as I told Noé, I thought I did advertise it on guix-devel, but
apparently not.

> BTW, that’s the typical subject for a RFC [1], IMHO. :-)

Sure.

> Why not try to push for crossing the final line of the RFC process first
> and make this as the first? ;-)
>
> 1: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/66844

That’s a question for you no?

I like to push things past the finish line in a timely fashion, so I
wouldn’t want this to be blocked by the RFC process definition process
(the process of defining the process…).

I already commented on the proposed RFC process.  I’m happy to further
contribute or even take the lead eventually when time permits, if you’d
like to pass it on.  It’s clearly the missing piece here.  We’ll get
there!

Ludo’.




This bug report was last modified 221 days ago.

Previous Next


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