Emily Shaffer <nasamuffin@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Thanks for writing this. I, for one, would love to see the process > evolve a little to account for the scale of work coming through the > list on any given day. However, that's a discussion that will be > easier to have once we have the status quo written and checked in. > ... > So, if nobody disagrees with the content of this document, I think we > should absolutely merge it. It will be great for newbies to see what > they're getting into, and for me to send to my boss to explain why my > predictions for my team's patches landing are so broad. Isn't it a bit too late to say "if nobody disagrees with", after it was pointed out that the world around here does not work that way (yet) about a week ago? If we have an agreeable v2 already posted on the list that I missed, then sorry, please disregard the above comment. I still don't think it captures "the status quo", which is what you want this document to be, about "larger-scale decisions", as the Introduction of the document says. Can we have a set of pointers in the document, when it gets rerolled, to an actual example of how we made such a larger-scale decision? Without such illustration with a real world example, it looks to me that what it describes is what we wish the process to be (which is not necessarily I would object to), but labeling it as "describing the status quo" is very much objectionable. Thanks.
