From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.153]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39C5F1AF0CA for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 21:00:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.153 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738270832; cv=none; b=aInLuh6iPJwpN3a9ud1fobZBKLad7a4EQA43Ojc1ZMs44mAkOUTiaOI0frNf2Hnix27ohkZOZswEnfUUQrm1npj0RxtKk98ewc89d0GGr6lMWWzarSs/I5WUORNtwYLhrdPZBxRRzNUEwBtkg4+8WbdiwssRZ0m5uT14ceQzmjk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738270832; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RwyyELcjlsj8fO8maeX02nXpagStMTDl76u+Yii9ifk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=U4UriSKPpdjsrSNK3O5nBHQ5V+yH7MrZve5MEvsyvxn4xukdmCdwovq2REOJHPgH/tQazSca8kOWr76Us/JYjtzRiyQdpDOkAty3MknY/vXQezPHP7n39sqWa6mQ/2iUB/z3f3tdmzFtTujyH/3BftAjdJqaTY/txlRe4TJiIos= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=jZwfVc2f; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=g/Unbv+1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.153 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="jZwfVc2f"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="g/Unbv+1" Received: from phl-compute-09.internal (phl-compute-09.phl.internal [10.202.2.49]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B5E211401A4; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 16:00:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-09.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 30 Jan 2025 16:00:29 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1738270829; x=1738357229; bh=9c0xyS4dNN km/2EhpHaR203cBeJFMwyzr4qZrGn0NoE=; b=jZwfVc2fq0114qcaKMrCo8JXlN Ec+5KNi2UvXZ5mchfe/cQctPoV2o2/4PApbx+Djrms3OWitp9jPWUDhyxY0oKErR hDLZsJ70OE/Cpx6uSFi9hjtbggiJxRnvD3/6GT2DIxJkccb18xdsQyiTE+chdMi/ Hp7Csx7iwjaIc2RhmZwVHfURwTCaBfJh1cwbt1otCWF7jjqPTYqbx9vkKdB7Z26+ 9eJ+DIXJGb9094w6I6+lTGSDlP6H5e8rCmIEg9N/er553jQPLw9bQBVAs4jwtfMM vj1FJd3mai98bQW0YBPWroDq9eqq2L0biEX4oqLRXRqCVD36tpjWs/oyvniQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1738270829; x=1738357229; bh=9c0xyS4dNNkm/2EhpHaR203cBeJFMwyzr4q ZrGn0NoE=; b=g/Unbv+1BlOQHfiwCJBGj54lQsDmW3erdL0LvembW6bgKIQuPRU nz7GZtGHF5zkSuKCiNOiG1nyPN9ZPgg94/2NcwWXZiPkGdOQsIRmJRg5ZK7SEcXT ebMPVELkYwu41X0kETe813BdDKjcq5FfzqHziFKlGBxVYUGkfuR4EpIRjjdFkw3t RrjZBl0qIXUVECSD/PIyrbBI4H2wazIDVwjDqa0y4lA4ygiYh3gPx1vtjtaihiuE uGth6Y6PJYaWnGR3n/cVmGLD3lMAhmcWkOdpTV9F2/YODH7EZJYDORB8sD3AWo+L 1yIC1liSotZ5Pb/3P/qITf2ZIeyHFhTVVCw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgdeikeeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnh htshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttdertden ucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcuvecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogi drtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepfeevteetjeehueegffelvdetieevffeufeej leeuffetiefggfeftdfhfeeigeeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrg hmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghp thhtohephedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepphhssehpkhhsrdhimh dprhgtphhtthhopehkrggrrhhtihgtrdhsihhvrghrrggrmhesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdp rhgtphhtthhopegthhhrihhsthhirghnrdgtohhuuggvrhesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprh gtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepghhi thhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 30 Jan 2025 16:00:28 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: Kaartic Sivaraam , Christian Couder , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: Git in GSoC 2025 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Thu, 30 Jan 2025 11:18:44 -0800") References: <8c8e8797-8de9-4684-94a0-f6c17a592dc5@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 13:00:27 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Junio C Hamano writes: > I do not mind either word, either, but I have two small issues to > raise: > > - Is each topic "owned" by some specific person? Would an owner > retires from the project, would the leftover bits go away with > the owner? I obviously meant "When an owner retires", but more importantly, I should have offered an alternative here, instead of just raising it as an issue. How about making the rule a lot simpler? The expiration date kicks in _mechanically_, i.e. stale entries are unconditionally dropped at the date, based solely on the comparison between the timestamp and the wall clock. People are free to advocate for its continued existence, and when such an effort achieves a concensus among then-active members of the community by the stated expiration date, a patch to update the entry's expiration date may be accepted, thereby prolonging its shelf life. Unless such a thing happens before the expiration date comes, we will mechanically drop the entry. Of course people _can_ resurrect an expired entry later as a new one when it seems appropriate. That makes the decision to expire things from the list easy to make. This is a tangent, perhaps we should adopt the same "drop mechanically purely based on timestamp, but allow resuscitation" rule for topic branches that take forever to hit 'next'. It would make my life a little bit simpler ;-). Thanks.