From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-b6-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b6-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.149]) (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 7A27E20318 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2025 16:09:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.149 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738339786; cv=none; b=GTCmohY6LZdOOx7dIrA0+V9TUgNAc1Wn+UKc8QfVrnqLSsPgrzblyUk5lKmKqp5EyUdbXP4w5/0oiRtDu7XA+gIOuuKbcI5ziO6JkB4yqN1gXcNECUsGNMy0Knx6Mb3mwF4XvofOJHDMYfBixlSVcK1lo12kI+r1k8IeIKgYyso= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738339786; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+95AK7SZZqO7N1zNV6imclHvAYppzfaK4JjA6L98XYg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=cEG3NKHJru4YC/mwem4yjItw5NP6dGiOSUmOqMVzdj+G4LuvP3XqgWusRGdLmcSn5h0k0DjZu3qBl+nhx+85nyNgagbA7oQiy62QYMHYX4qDK3lyQSWMwJbCShuH1Ecdf063To5cp4iAwWjjRcRvJNQbM5DWZq2g91Ol0dvu1HY= 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=dfVtNN3f; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=ztpS4H6o; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.149 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="dfVtNN3f"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="ztpS4H6o" Received: from phl-compute-03.internal (phl-compute-03.phl.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71CDF114011F; Fri, 31 Jan 2025 11:09:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-03.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 31 Jan 2025 11:09:43 -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=1738339783; x=1738426183; bh=U+tXcT0J6M A8UwAQ+2uI5rqfkRZbEb6FzcXIPEmlTrg=; b=dfVtNN3fXWW9uamIuzWFiuRiqi MVSHEoPqlZbDQXolclV9vh3QGSwE0Dl1R1pxsrwUJraxf+ZlVuy7SSIpNgCbj3n+ 1idEqLSDPNlk4jq13QKqxcI6WOSl+6LdH55GsYHkOaGNzfVOcGmgZiEYneh3PrCl 2kMCZ0whNc5lDM1x3RRkzoSdq6veHq2xrkbyOz/rEor6OwUwx7NFe33P/G6GyQTb FXGMisIJ42rH+J9MihUQ0UOAp1EIcStQFf/f+IY6+M14k1MDhZ8J8sJKnb63ElDe Q3PMGpGYimD/WlQkfB/7bPpAkRCRtDPaVMhaXz6tuYHeJaDNflWNVwTGFg3w== 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= 1738339783; x=1738426183; bh=U+tXcT0J6MA8UwAQ+2uI5rqfkRZbEb6FzcX IPEmlTrg=; b=ztpS4H6oHYgeWN/b7iP/dF/4M26zzh0YU8RZrluwpGW0Us4PXQU Me+SuIcJUOI5qxnbIoK1DPnSNk7bpx98wgzj0yDwSJpm9e6k3MAA/ilh7R+56iD6 Z0qBHfzADTvkhwKaKcfnFXcISIDgxyNLCKgNvpnJ/XAI/ygIDcQdOzs06hU9Nebx Yu7ypzQ0SKjxusRD0aSRK9SCrPAJMEpwtKlBeFQaygWTUtqZEFU2DW+kYpEhr3Ac KgErGNikTwVDVVK3yMVn2s9mR+5gDSodwceH5gakkHUdCy6qIlV044D+QK9O0t31 9XTML1H3VRgaHpkcLqPN0Rehh1TdvE81TVw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgdelvdduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf 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; Fri, 31 Jan 2025 11:09:42 -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: (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Fri, 31 Jan 2025 05:51:51 +0100") References: <8c8e8797-8de9-4684-94a0-f6c17a592dc5@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2025 08:09:41 -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 Patrick Steinhardt writes: >> 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. > > Works for me. Ideally, as any other topic, the retirement should be sent > to the mailing list as a normal patch series so that people may chime in > on the retirement and state reasons why they don't think that is a good > idea. That is the complete opposite of the ideal from my point of view. The whole point of making the list items expire by default is that the onus is on those who want to have them on list to justify why these items must remain on the list. A patch to remove an item that hasn't had anybody advocating for its retention shouldn't have to be chimed in to be supported. There shouldn't even have to be a patch; that is what I mean by "stale entries expire mechanically by default". Thanks.