| 30 Jan 2023 |
 dachary.org | All toots announcing a release are pinned and stay pinned. Is it good practice or not? Is it confusing? I don't know 😊 | 17:58:50 |
 Nulo | I think the first one I sent is fine, as it's an invitation for people to migrate | 17:58:56 |
 Otto Richter | In reply to @dachary:matrix.org
All toots announcing a release are pinned and stay pinned. Is it good practice or not? Is it confusing? I don't know 😊 No, bad practice. If someone visits a profile, they'll need to scroll through all of the pinned toots until they reach up2date content. | 17:59:36 |
| dachary.org | Nulo: I suspect people have different opinions on the matter. I do not and will happily follow whatever makes most sense. | 17:59:44 |
| Otto Richter | I think there should be only a few pinned posts, or at least it should possible to scroll past them with only three strikes of your mouse. | 18:00:10 |
| dachary.org | Ok, so I will unpin old toots now. Is it ok? | 18:00:13 |
| dachary.org | Maybe just keep two: the latest release and the latest monthly report? | 18:00:41 |
| dachary.org | I would be super happy if a knowledgeable Forgejo community member is willing to manage this with me as a backup 🙏 | 18:01:15 |
 | Also, can you remove the IPA from the profile description since I think we removed it everywhere else? | 18:01:15 |
| dachary.org | IPA removed. | 18:02:31 |
| dachary.org | https://floss.social/@forgejo has just two pinned toots now. | 18:04:21 |
| Otto Richter | I'm reading the Decision making guide again, and I'm wondering:
Is there a minimum wait time for decisions specified, or do we rely on common sense?
I was wondering if we need to prevent fast decisions, e.g. when team members want to push a thing and give the required votes in no time. | 18:16:58 |
 gusted |
Wait (recommended: 2 weeks) to give people time to do that, ping people you believe may be impacted by the decision to make sure they have a chance to participate
| 18:17:51 |
| gusted | Relies on trust that we do this in good-faith. | 18:18:13 |
| dachary.org | In reply to @otto_richter:matrix.tu-berlin.de
I'm reading the Decision making guide again, and I'm wondering:
Is there a minimum wait time for decisions specified, or do we rely on common sense?
I was wondering if we need to prevent fast decisions, e.g. when team members want to push a thing and give the required votes in no time. The general idea is to wait at least two weeks even for simple decisions. | 18:24:20 |
| dachary.org | In reply to @otto_richter:matrix.tu-berlin.de
I'm reading the Decision making guide again, and I'm wondering:
Is there a minimum wait time for decisions specified, or do we rely on common sense?
I was wondering if we need to prevent fast decisions, e.g. when team members want to push a thing and give the required votes in no time. * The general idea is to wait at least two weeks even for simple decisions. Otherwise volunteers may miss the opportunity to weigh in: there is a need to ensure at least one week-end, the best time for them to participate. | 18:25:11 |
| dachary.org | In reply to @gusted:matrix.org
Relies on trust that we do this in good-faith. The entire governance is based on good faith. The hope is that by bootstrapping this in a way that makes sure everyone is able to trigger a decision, concerns about actions done in bad faith will trigger a reaction that will lead to a decision to fix this problem. | 18:27:32 |
| Otto Richter | Sorry, I somehow overlooked this. I think I mainly read the general basic method. | 18:27:56 |
| dachary.org | It is supremely difficult to foresee how that will manifest. The only thing we know for sure is that it will happen because it is human nature. | 18:28:05 |
| Otto Richter | I'm satisfied, and agree. | 18:28:17 |
| dachary.org | The documentation of the decision making process so that it is simple to digest is the current topic of the governance meetings. It is currently somewhat fuzzy. | 18:30:20 |
| dachary.org | * The documentation of the decision making process so that it is simple to digest is the current topic of the governance meetings. It is currently somewhat fuzzy and difficult to grasp, even if the foundations are solid and make sense to me. | 18:30:44 |
| dachary.org | * The documentation of the decision making process so that it is simple to digest is the current topic of the governance meetings. I think it is currently somewhat fuzzy and difficult to grasp, even if the foundations are solid and make sense to me. | 18:30:57 |
|  catboomer (@catboomer@mk.absturztau.be) changed their profile picture. | 18:51:00 |
| Nulo | I'm interested in subscribing (email or whatever) to releases in a repo. As far as I can tell, this isn't possible, there's just the incredibly broad "watch" option which doesn't describe exactly what you will be notified of. I want this because I use it to watch releases of things I run/maintain a package of. | 20:04:05 |
 Olivier | There is a RSS feed on the homepage:
https://forgejo.org/releases/rss.xml | 21:13:56 |
| Olivier | Will contain: https://forgejo.org/releases/ | 21:14:11 |
| Olivier | (Since such a feed is not available in Forgejo for now) | 21:14:36 |
 crystal | If you watch a repo you will receive release notifications, but you will also receive notifications for pretty much every other event involving that repo. I would very much like to see more fine-grained watch controls added in the near future but I'm certainly not holding my breath for it. | 22:21:11 |
| crystal | Fetching releases from Forgejo's API should be fairly straightforward though, so writing a little applet that can take care of it for you shouldn't be too tricky. | 22:21:51 |
