!CJXQiUGqNPcFonEdME:nixos.org

NixOS Foundation

437 Members
Public room for chatting with the NixOS Foundation Board106 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
11 Dec 2024
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them) joined the room.02:54:59
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them)I had a question about "Creation and Management of Teams". Specifically, RFC 0146 reads that "it is strongly recommended the creation of a team entrusted with authority to manage issues related to categorization and carry their corresponding duties".03:09:30
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them) The constitution reads:
The SC[...] has the following responsibilities:
...
Creation and Management of Teams:
* Establish and manage teams to delegate authority on specific areas
* Delegate authority to long-term teams and committees , allowing them to evolve policies as needed

Was creating the categorization team in correspondence with the RFC but presumably without SC approval constitutional?
03:12:37
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them)(Apologies if this is the wrong place for this question)03:15:23
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them) The constitution reads:
The SC[...] has the following responsibilities:
...
Creation and Management of Teams:
* Establish and manage teams to delegate authority on specific areas
* Delegate authority to long-term teams and committees , allowing them to evolve policies as needed
...

Was creating the categorization team in correspondence with the RFC but presumably without SC approval constitutional?
03:21:07
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them)Am I also correct in assuming that internal team policies (the big thing is obtaining consensus on categories) would also need to be approved by the SC?03:28:53
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them)* Am I also correct in assuming that internal team policies (the big thing is obtaining consensus on which categories to create/remove) would also need to be approved by the SC?03:29:11
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaI would be surprised if the SC was interested in micromanaging this team03:30:35
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa Hey! Any progress on this topic? 03:31:43
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them)
In reply to@hexa:lossy.network
I would be surprised if the SC was interested in micromanaging this team
I agree. I'm mostly bringing this up to establish precedent about the scope of the RFC process (as a practical example, instead of a theoretical)
03:32:10
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them)* I agree. I'm mostly bringing this up to establish precedent about the scope of the RFC process (as a practical example, instead of a theoretical) in relation to the SC and Constitution03:32:21
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them)* I agree. I'm mostly bringing this up to establish precedent about the scope of the RFC process (as a practical example, instead of a theoretical example) in relation to the SC and Constitution03:34:22
@winter:catgirl.cloudWinter
In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
Hey! Any progress on this topic?
i just brought it up internally, hopefully will have an answer soon, thanks for the reminder
04:31:19
@tomberek:matrix.orgtomberekI wouldn't mind having one. Though it seems de-facto this channel is serving a similar purpose.04:59:42
@clover.pyro:matrix.orgpyrotelekinetic (she/her) joined the room.06:23:24
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielle
In reply to @tomodachi94:matrix.org
I agree. I'm mostly bringing this up to establish precedent about the scope of the RFC process (as a practical example, instead of a theoretical example) in relation to the SC and Constitution

FWIW the intention (as an author of said doc) is that teams with authority should also have the SC as approvers of the teams charter. Not as micromanagement - but as "making sure that people are actually well equipped to do the thing they want to do, and that it is in line with the rest of the constitution and policies", then staying out of the way.

12:50:55
@danielle:fairydust.spacedaniellebut for stuff that was in flight prior to this kicking off.... shrug... that's a thing the SC should probably reconcile over time12:51:57
@danielle:fairydust.spacedanielle(as we figure out cultural norms)12:52:14
@marijan:matrix.orgmarijan changed their profile picture.14:20:43
@tomberek:matrix.orgtomberek
In reply to @tomodachi94:matrix.org
The constitution reads:
The SC[...] has the following responsibilities:
...
Creation and Management of Teams:
* Establish and manage teams to delegate authority on specific areas
* Delegate authority to long-term teams and committees , allowing them to evolve policies as needed
...

Was creating the categorization team in correspondence with the RFC but presumably without SC approval constitutional?

This seems fine, partially because it was approved before the SC and constitution existed (double check?). But regardless, the SC should not be a bottleneck for people to self organize and get things done. We do have a responsibility to do it when specific authority is required to be delegated. Or if a conflict exists, some contention.

Regarding the cultural norms; I like to revisit the values:

Distribute decisionmaking widely

We are a synthesis of varied but overlapping communities. We rely on distributed approaches: asynchronous communication, clear ownership, deep-dive taskforces, and local decisionmaking.

So, (my personal opinion only, not SC) is that if people are motivated to help make Nixpkgs categorization better, get organized, and establish a taskforce to do so, then I love it and support it.

14:32:17
@k_t.666:matrix.orgkat ⛧ they/them joined the room.19:24:29
13 Dec 2024
@ronef:matrix.orgronefhttps://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-foundation-board-rotation-call-for-nominations/57381 Announcing the NixOS Foundation Board Rotation - Call for Nomination :) 18:50:32
@rosscomputerguy:matrix.orgTristan Ross I put in my nomination 20:05:31
14 Dec 2024
@omniweb:matrix.orgomniweb joined the room.15:23:40
@adda0:matrix.org@adda0:matrix.org left the room.18:22:02
15 Dec 2024
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunatThere's an RFC that might (maybe) be better suited the Steering Committee than the usual process: https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/18519:19:51
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunat(I hope some of SC read this room. This place was the first that came to my mind.)19:21:50
@winter:catgirl.cloudWinterty19:29:56
18 Dec 2024
@tim126:matrix.orgtim126 joined the room.15:50:30
@dmiskovic:matrix.org@dmiskovic:matrix.org joined the room.19:36:36

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 10