[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR

On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 04:16:58PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst writes ("Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR"):
> > You can formally propose a GR today, and I recommend you do -- otherwise
> > we end up discussing things before the discussion period, and then you
> > need to sit and wait at least seven days during the *actual* discussion
> > period for no good reason.
> I see what you mean, but respectfully, I disagree.  There is no real
> hurry about this - it is a long-term thing.  It is worth taking the
> time to not just get the options right, but also keep everyone
> comfortable.


> In particular, if the DPL were to formally propose a GR, everyone who
> wanted another option on the ballot would immediately be on the clock:
> we would have to get our alternative either agreed with the DPL, or
> seconded, within 7 days, if we wanted to be sure.

Strictly speaking, this is correct.

Having said that though, I would expect a DPL who proposes a GR to not
call for a vote (even though they would be allowed to do so) when people
are still drafting alternate options and/or amendments.

Additionally, the DPL has the ability to vary the discussion period in
*both* directions. Rather than shortening it to 7 days, they can also
lengthen it to 3 weeks.

> Given the febrile atmosphere that some of these systemd discussions
> generate I think we want at the very least the process to avoid any
> hint of anything that feels threatening.

Such a DPL could state the above in public, to clarify that they're not
going to hurry anyone -- but that this is something they want to see
happen (at some point in the reasonably close future).

> I also agree with the people who suggested that it would be best if
> options were drafted by people who actually agree with them.

This is the core of my argument, yes. I don't think that it is useful
for anyone (DPL or otherwise) to propose a GR with more options than
what they themselves would want to vote for.

(there is a difference between drafting an option and seconding one in
this regard though)

> It is of course helpful of the DPL to guide that process, but
> ultimately the way the governance system is supposed to work is that
> people put forward their _own_ options.

Exactly; and I did not feel like that was happening here.

Anyway, I also understand what Sam is trying to do, and I would rather
not sound like a whiner, so this'll be the last bit I'll say about this

To the thief who stole my anti-depressants: I hope you're happy

  -- seen somewhere on the Internet on a photo of a billboard

Reply to: