Subject: Re: [bug#74736] [PATCH v6] Add Request-for-Comments process.

From: Simon Tournier <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 13:45:02 +0100

Hi Janneke,

On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 08:44, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <[email-masked]> wrote:

>> # Motivation
>
> Am I right that the main purpose/intent is (not trying to twist anyone's words)

[...]

>   * to draw more attention to / have important discussions stand out
>   more in all the "noise", and guided by

[...]

>   * a collective decision on what "important" is?

Yes! :-)

>                                    A drawback could be that it slows
> development down, but for important changes that may be a good thing?

I would you say yes :-)

And I would also say it’s a counter measure against “Why wasn't I
consulted“ [1] or some bullet points [2] from the talk that appear to me
helpful and that had been inspiration.

1: https://youtu.be/m0rakUuPXFM
2: https://simon.tournier.info/posts/2023-10-30-toward-rfc.html

> The only things that I could suggest is to see if we should make it even
> be more lightweight/nimble as a first version, e.g, require only two
> *persons*, so that two authors could start a submission
>
>     The RFC is *submitted* once it has at least one co-author or
>     supporter in addition to the initial author(s).

Ah you mean that the case of ’two authors’ does not require a Sponsor*,
right?

*Sponsor: was ’Supporter’ but renamed in order to avoid confusion
 between supporting the Document before the Discussion Period and
 replying ’I support’ during the Delibration Period.

> or use shorter periods, e.g.
>
>     submission[label=<Submission Period<br />up to 7 days>]
>     comments[label=<Discussion Period<br />15–60 days>]
>     deliberation[label=<Deliberation Period<br />8-14 days>]
>
> but I have no strong opinion on these.

About the Discussion Period, I do not have an opinion.  From my
intuition, it appears to be helpful when all have the time and space for
expressing their comments.

About the Deliberation Period, I think we need to have enough time and 2
weeks sound the good range based on what we are already doing for patch
review.

Thanks for the comments.

Cheers,
simon