hi,

based on the discussion on debian-devel@ I'd suggest that noone sponsors this GR and thus we could avoid having a GR about this.

\o/

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2025/03/msg00225.html explains it well: "I doubt that a GR is justified, especially if all it's going to end up
doing is adding a recommendation for format=flowed to the CoC that isn't actually required for people to adopt the use of format=flowed."

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2025/03/msg00269.html has some stats about the thread on -devel.

HTH.


--
cheers,
Holger

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
⠈⠳⣄

"tja" - a German reaction to the apocalypse, dawn of the gods, nuclear war,
an alien attack or no bread in the house.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEuL9UE3sJ01zwJv6dCRq4VgaaqhwFAmfVxsIACgkQCRq4Vgaa qhx1+g/9Fl7XGPtnwfE+lQ1szAxdoVoVhfimF6D0hM/bfznB3uG9LG00anzi0kgD HUTgnfni7bdfB5sEAIO4H7lTxx0CjQaj7GBs5RSSv63vzDMBn/75uTZ7697CS6dO 2A5Nb6jAVGn+zYgIIkuOL0G/OoQA6MBKPtNKpKkd3VCPKZxQeVDQQFEnX/qV5hy/ hsrkF0x6g9o/+sSfoRiHGdURZOLOl3SwPp0+1isRCk+d3WgUIP+Hv63ryCbuzcce irNLOBhEOUhtLIOGxuZzFTCuRVavheoZ8Zr8vze5IaGJwn5JMzER+ng9SzLx5O9J vBunegMx3tYOdAGa/9Y4gSIan5ZX+GC2P02dfz1Qwy68H/OUUFvR8NkpO+MfWQX5 ACIbgggYhCLYxPy79qKci0zIYIvY1vMWFv2xBG7BewGKR5G9xpuboP1iUrvszBdX aoj3ykMQ9BmfxoZdsaUdOGohoSHmmnQQn4gvv0cRUcoFQybw/ykuxLdDm0RX+NPA c8dzl3OQdlw93uo4kVboZhY4ksc8xQqkymvxdfral54FJSNimq9elRX61tb7

On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 06:28:18PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:

hi,

based on the discussion on debian-devel@ I'd suggest that noone sponsors this GR and thus we could avoid having a GR about this.

Normally, for any simple GR we have a series of options

Yes
No
Further discussion
None of the above

Can I suggest a further default to be added to every future vote as an
option - something like

"This GR discussion is inappropriate or shows some other reason why this GR should not have been raised"

That would give a better explanation for some people to explain the motivation for voting in a particular way and might encourage a valid vote rather than
an abstention.

With every good wish, as ever,

Andy Cater
(amacater@debian.org)

--
cheers,
Holger

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 06:28:18PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:

hi,

based on the discussion on debian-devel@ I'd suggest that noone sponsors this GR and thus we could avoid having a GR about this.

\o/

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2025/03/msg00225.html explains it well: "I doubt that a GR is justified, especially if all it's going to end up
doing is adding a recommendation for format=flowed to the CoC that isn't actually required for people to adopt the use of format=flowed."

If that was all the proposed GR sought (i.e., to replace wrap=80 w/ format=flowed), then maybe it would be relevant.

However, Soren is proposing replacing the language about wrap=80 with
this: "There is no expectation that emails sent to the mailing lists are wrapped by the sender at a particular column, but those sending emails
may wrap them if they choose."

Given the discussion on the matter, that seems like a sensible
proposition.

Regards,

-Roberto

--
Roberto C. S�nchez

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)