GNU bug report logs - #74736
[PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Andreas Enge <andreas <at> enge.fr>
Cc: Arun Isaac <arunisaac <at> systemreboot.net>, guix-maintainers <at> gnu.org, zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com, mail <at> cbaines.net, efraim <at> flashner.co.il, rekado <at> elephly.net, guix-devel <at> gnu.org, 74736 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <janneke <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [bug#74736] [PATCH v2 0/1] Add Request-For-Comment process.
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 17:10:12 +0100

Hello!

Andreas Enge <andreas <at> enge.fr> skribis:

> Concerning consensus, I am mildly worried about deadlocks (including 
> when trying to modify this RFC/GCD). What happens if some person insists
> on disapproving?

This is a general question about consensus building.

For the situation you describe not to happen, the “conditions for
consensus” must be meant, as explained for instance in:

  https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus#conditions

Perhaps the “Decision Making” section could stress that, with a
paragraph above “To learn …” along these lines:

  Consensus building requires that participants share a common goal,
  trust each other to act in good faith, listen to one another’s
  concerns to take them into account, and are committed to donating
  enough of their time to achieve it.

A deliberating member who “insists on disapproving”, without proposing
alternative paths, wouldn’t meet these requirements.

I believe right now people who become team members or committers have
already demonstrated these abilities.  I think this is where these
expectations should be clarified and agreed upon.

Ludo’.

Previous Next

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