| 1 |
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:48 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Tue, 2021-09-28 at 17:36 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 4 |
> > I know I'm going to regret asking this... but I've prepared a change to |
| 5 |
> > the Portage output format and I think it asks for a wider discussion |
| 6 |
> > than internally in Portage team. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> As I suspected, I truly regret sending this mail. I'm dangerously close |
| 9 |
> to burning out, so I'm going to retract these patches. When you decide |
| 10 |
> what you want and make patches for it, feel free to send them to |
| 11 |
> Portage. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Keep in mind that while distributing patches and soliciting comments |
| 14 |
is a good practice, I don't believe any of our policies REQUIRE that |
| 15 |
you: |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
1. Reply to anybody who comments. |
| 18 |
2. Address any comments. |
| 19 |
3. Wait until anybody (let alone everybody) agrees before proceeding. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I think that we sometimes let the requirement to communicate somehow |
| 22 |
stifle the desire to get things done. While I don't recommend it, you |
| 23 |
can technically satisfy any communications requirements by posting |
| 24 |
your patch and literally never checking your email before committing |
| 25 |
it. Obviously if you mess something up in doing so you'll look dumb, |
| 26 |
but it isn't intended to be a bureaucratic requirement. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I suggest just skimming the comments to see if there is anything that |
| 29 |
seems like a good idea, then implementing those ideas (which you'll |
| 30 |
probably want to do anyway), and ignore the rest without comment. If |
| 31 |
somebody has a problem with what you're doing, the onus is on them to |
| 32 |
go find somebody to complain to in order to stop you. If you're the |
| 33 |
maintainer then you don't need permission to commit. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
In my experience the Council is fairly resistant to requests to meddle |
| 36 |
for things that aren't super-critical, so I'd be shocked if they |
| 37 |
didn't just ack and dismiss any request to bikeshed exactly what |
| 38 |
prefix your elog output uses. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Open to contrary opinions, but IMO I think maintainers perceive that |
| 41 |
the distro is more consensus-driven than it actually is. You don't |
| 42 |
have to "win" the email battle. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
Rich |
Archives