Hi Nilesh, > On 20/04/26 2:42 am, Nilesh Patra wrote: > > In any case, the current policy changes should probably be reverted **for > > now**. > > At the very least > > https://go-team.pages.debian.net/workflow-changes.html#_2026_03_changes > > should > > be renamed to 2026_03_proposed_changes as this right now conveys the wrong > > message. > > > > I'll make a merge request in a week or more if nobody else beats me to it. > > https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/go-team.pages.debian.net/-/merge_requests/21 > https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/go-team.pages.debian.net/-/merge_requests/22
Thanks for opening MRs instead of doing a direct revert, and thanks for creating two MRs so people can vote between moving the new changes under the title "Proposed" (!22) instead of just throwing away all changes (!21) that went in via multiple MRs over several weeks. Hopefully more people will cast their vote. Currently the 3 people who have voted to throw away the changes and a completely separate group of people from those 7 people who participated in making them, so if you intend to merge !21, I think it should have at least 8 or more votes before you merge it. The Go team policy does not define how to propose changes, how they are voted on, who gets to vote, who is a Go team member, the criteria for becoming or being removed from the group, whether there is an "inner group" with more permissions than others, or if there is a team lead or other member roles with special duties or powers and so forth. If you build a proper team larger than a group of friends, these things usually must be agreed upon for the group to function. Currently in Debian lacks a culture for proper team organization, so this is not unique to the Go team. I might propose how we could organize and govern ourselves in the future, but I don't have a concrete proposal right now, just vague ideas such as that we should maybe only add new people to the https://salsa.debian.org/groups/go-team/-/group_members group if they have a track record of packaging first, and, say, two existing members who vouch for them. I also agree with Simon's and Arnaud's observation: we currently lack enough active, experienced people to maintain the policy. I have also observed that several very talented people who were active in the Go team have left due to dysfunctional processes they encountered and could not fix. Debian and this team attract talented people who subscribe to Debian's advertised ethos, but the reality of how things work ends up alienating them, which I find sad. After writing that, I am still hopeful and think this is just a phase in how Debian matures, and we will get to the next level once some collaboration enabling structure is in place and more people start thinking in mote team-oriented ways instead of the current mostly solo working dev perspective.
