From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from crane.ash.relay.mailchannels.net (crane.ash.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.222.43]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE8933858404; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 21:07:11 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org DE8933858404 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gotplt.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gotplt.org X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|siddhesh@gotplt.org Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732DEE08FD; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 21:07:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a307 (unknown [127.0.0.6]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BC7C9E0DC3; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 21:07:06 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-2022; d=mailchannels.net; t=1665090427; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=0SUCJu6ZMXUqPuE18wDsO7SAfbrkbfASXITBn+QEa8tRe4y2Gw4P4YrsJwITUmUsNamnHw HqcKfJocOLpRw+RCTOq5lFk0Rcq/Ubh7U/guD6dxgS6ipQFG99xJk7zII2mZvUlLw+KwEY 5S4A3rFWjqHN1vtRJtxTbWkDX1mOs535gfN4uPUeJZqhCtJGv/aIsn0sOk8Nl+Wihtbx8i gS3g5svafZYkMtsus0nWVlKQWqELQG0ESsbfQ/BLyitHtlpsYRf9Vwl/tP1cbnzwoMCQKH cO1LxzyD9f2P4OA6AMVEUHnZC8CV6b3kV3oGJhMiij8YOTZJbKmmwJtXBPBvVw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailchannels.net; s=arc-2022; t=1665090427; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=s/xcfEAsvj7fwJL9iOjQVQUvUcMJIGSEePBqyVy2+bQ=; b=qPnPRFO9PoSUT7tFOgn18QLppHT/icuTOdKk+tajHJVbkIXDfGe8T2XRk1BERa6jA4Jgy8 Rvo1erjXdNzW26oqjA3R3u3fX4hcir8ll9f5wN0OXceB92jM/3b8ekCf2eoKvikvPVhA3R ZmRCPqqgCo8+nv9V+cOuOm9Bwk9Nz6sBK7ZQbsdQJEhNUUp+4IA/BvsmNx0l4G0LxlyQSz wIM/SFWRLk22Wu9Lfc1UGD8S8vBvO2lzW3/3TPGYXY/TOS0rFrDUSNy4gYxiu4TufJMqZ0 gYv/mjPl69WpfbGduwXQ9pnYQWe8cpx4HvMFsmdnI/+4UqsxR9Bj2uFZ5fgzRw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; rspamd-6d4bb977-dgxhg; auth=pass smtp.auth=dreamhost smtp.mailfrom=siddhesh@gotplt.org X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|siddhesh@gotplt.org X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|siddhesh@gotplt.org X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Average-Belong: 629505504bd1aeb3_1665090427235_2423324502 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1665090427235:3775635446 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1665090427235 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a307 (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by 100.121.28.227 (trex/6.7.1); Thu, 06 Oct 2022 21:07:07 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.182] (bras-base-toroon4834w-grc-23-76-68-24-82.dsl.bell.ca [76.68.24.82]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: siddhesh@gotplt.org) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a307 (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Mk3sh3kMYz1w; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 14:07:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gotplt.org; s=dreamhost; t=1665090426; bh=s/xcfEAsvj7fwJL9iOjQVQUvUcMJIGSEePBqyVy2+bQ=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:From:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=axMwERKGYC4LfRE9agK5P7iiZPHOuxG8p+/XhzH+LvwDscP/k8LY8AXqPGsnRaOaE r+Dc8zLyiZZTHysMNxqQjJgsQCGuCYB+teXWgBjHY4IUiNVm4ci+ZYH+O6R2Vws53D dJGjAc/09VinJAw6xQpnuOSVnTw15MeebW8awmpklPYxxwGl4suOF0WsPoBdUvx5UB 5qP188uWxkl6kzcz0EmzCN6n5DQdQOaA9QCNAzBCtWXMTaWyvWDexNND1HmgzwlM4R cp0wVoGEEs+wldzbBDlhy5F48W1AQOJ+TwFiJpNM3Exe6sIL/ykEbKy/PGeJCz43Y6 Xwr26ADuanB0A== Message-ID: Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2022 17:07:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.12.0 Subject: Re: The GNU Toolchain Infrastructure Project Content-Language: en-US To: Mark Wielaard , Overseers mailing list Cc: gdb@sourceware.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <6f6d141b-b776-8707-2c91-dc38d20aa9e1@gotplt.org> <20221004171007.oc2ot6eu6l24aipn@cgf.cx> <05b0f7fa-7077-5a8b-0c2f-dfb3068dd10f@gotplt.org> From: Siddhesh Poyarekar In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3032.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 2022-10-06 16:02, Mark Wielaard wrote: >> I had in fact missed the websites mention, sorry I overreacted to your >> comment. In that case, I don't know if the GNU websites are actually part >> of this proposal. > > No worries. It seems everybody is somewhat unclear on the details of > this proposal. Making it hard for people not to speculate a > little. And it seems the scope changed between when various "key > stakeholders" were informed, the LF/IT presentation, the Cauldron talk > and what eventually got posted. I had not noticed the mention of websites in the proposal, which is why I was taken aback by its mention here. That oversight is my fault, nothing to do with the proposal itself. Could you clarify in what way you think the *scope* got changed between the private communications and the proposal that actually got posted? The technical details (which is different from scope) were never meant to be baked in, that's for the TAC to agree upon. In that sense, the proposal details being open-ended is by design. > That is why we are trying to collect all details and file sourceware > infrastructure bugs to track the various technical needs from a Fair enough. > community perspective. But it would be really nice to hear directly > from the Linux Foundation and the OpenSSF about what exactly they are > proposing, which parts of the proposal are mandatory, which can be > mixed and matched, and how they see this working together with > Sourceware becoming a Software Freedom Conservancy member > project. You and others have been repeating "sourceware as a project" in a community owned sense as a truth for a while now but it really isn't. It is Red Hat owned infrastructure that is maintained by volunteers. It is unquestioningly a community (and I'm proud part of it as someone who maintains the patchwork instance), but that's not the same thing as being an independent project that can do agreements and sign up for memberships. Maybe Red Hat could spin off a sourceware project in some form that is actually capable of becoming a SFC member? Or alternatively, "sourceware overseers" could become a body that maintains sourceware and is able to get funding through SFC for its activities? Thanks, Sid