On Sun, 3 May 2026 17:54:58 +0200 Andreas Enge <[email protected]> wrote: > [...] their voice does not count towards the quorum > (which may make the proposal fail eventually, although in a rather > frustrating manner). I understand your message like this.
Yes, but in addition to that I also wanted to bring my point as this has several impacts: - if it fails due to the lack of quorum, and that later on my point is addressed because people are ok with addressing it, then I would most likely vote for the proposition and not against it. - It might still be possible to clarify the proposition once it is passed but I've no idea how this would be possible. - If my point was already addressed somewhere else, discussed, and so on and that I missed it, someone might tell me that, and I could go look at the discussions. - This also gives feedback on the process somehow. Also note that I became part of a team very recently so I also need to adjust to all that and so on, and the discussions may have started way before I joined or maybe I just missed them due to the lack of time. And I am very interested in some of the debates (I even participated in some while not being part of a team yet) but it also requires a big investment in time, and I've ideas to improve that, but ironically, at the end this would require a GCD, which in turn would require even more time if I was the one to propose that. Addressing my comment could also be fixed by a new GCD but it would require even more time than addressing the issue in this GCD, as the new GCD would have to clarify how to not-break packages, and this seems to be a complex topic. Denis.
pgp_yJmnv3Wzx.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
