Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Alex Alexander
The Council will have its next meeting on the 26th of July, 2010.

The meeting will begin at 1900 UTC.

You may use [0] to find out the correct time in your timezone.

Here's a draft list of the meeting topics so far:
* vote on adding --as-needed to the default profile's LDFLAGS
* discuss (and maybe vote on) required-use
        http://dev.gentoo.org/~ferringb/required-use.html

A detailed agenda will follow in a few days.

If you have anything you'd like to push to the council for
discussion, feel free to reply to this thread.

[0] meeting time in your timezone:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~wired/localtime.php?time=1900
--
Alex Alexander :: wired
Gentoo Developer
www.linuxized.com

attachment0 (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto-2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 17-07-2010 23:33, Brian Harring wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 01:05:02AM +0300, Alex Alexander wrote:
>> The Council will have its next meeting on the 26th of July, 2010.
>>
>> The meeting will begin at 1900 UTC.
>>
>> You may use [0] to find out the correct time in your timezone.
>>
>> Here's a draft list of the meeting topics so far:
>> * vote on adding --as-needed to the default profile's LDFLAGS
>> * discuss (and maybe vote on) required-use
>>         http://dev.gentoo.org/~ferringb/required-use.html
>
> Adding eclass removal policy to the agenda; it directly affects devs,
> and the previous policy (imo) is misinterpretted slightly.
>
> Specifically, 06/01/08, portage 2.1.4.4 went stable; this had env
> saving/restoration support.  The original council decree was that
> eclasses had to sit for 2 years- I very strongly posit that the time
> period there should've been bound to portage env capabilities rather
> than eclass timelines.
>
> Reasoning is simple enough- w/ a proper PM, eclasses can be
> removed/modified at will without affecting binpkgs/installed pkgs.
>
> So the question I'd like on the agenda is basically if there is any
> reason to preserve the decree- if not, punt it.

I would like to have the council discuss this issue again. We should
probably also address the issue of EAPI changes in eclasses that was
subject of a recent thread in the dev ml.

> ~harring

Let's add to the agenda the use of the invalid DEPEND atom
"EAPI_TOO_OLD" instead of calling die in global scope on eclasses.

I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
ML do we want to use?

- --
Regards,

Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMQnFRAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPpFwP/2gvNqk4RIektsFEjJZ7NhIf
OcOSgBVMHFyXv7CDVP0e39bdajcH0ll2pGHYRTSHbPN0SBUN56UguRrDnlUWTjCc
DMAEd9Z4xkFh07BTiDiZI1w6tm0rkjxUV3NWpKQShAxJwDNXL6j5Qvdzy/ZJPFbB
TZYWRRNLBJ5fbHyCHqp5yELbflETgO148o1INyPKBB2NtmdWGHXjPUZMLQOLV9Gg
eE9btQ9EU2Xi8e9bqacThEoy1UuRoG4WXn3qpgpRLSZ9H84mAKJohFKCSyntgvgU
J1AldKMRTbhB+CQZ+AUG6bCIG2mtFxiL5BtapUmRUo0P/jMtt+NXQ1WL5O8vOV7t
J/tUz8C/kRx/I/IIQlYOv24ZgemC5waSlYOWFN8+f1gKou0Yent/GMb0QlIMrtrU
2Xx0OrbAT1JuNCobo3D9iDJsRAtOgUbg8JziUxidNwlpQqz9mgXcL7wHtBSqoYXX
UDVYyoSZwv2xEZjdr1dUMe3oDHnawbnrPW4I4o7jkPgKoszd3T1pwR83lzWHb42m
u5/YnSBtKP5dfGCEcAwVPgpG8xzYx3wcfI60tuDFxBIl8gAHrFgnDQgS3MDt+qPe
Cu9Nr4hrbmBfLzwcqNbk8QiGbjUzBG2jtrWASD6QAhDhF+pow6d3nPWXPivnUJAz
drTCQgdwR21TIg8LGfrY
=N+f/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Alex Alexander
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 03:13:22AM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
> Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
> ML do we want to use?

IMO we should be using [hidden email] for this.
Afterall, we are talking about the Council meeting agenda.

Any topic that needs further discussion before a meeting should be moved
to its own -dev thread anyway.
--
Alex Alexander :: wired
Gentoo Developer
www.linuxized.com

attachment0 (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Mike Frysinger
On Saturday, July 17, 2010 23:47:39 Alex Alexander wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 03:13:22AM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> > I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
> > Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
> > ML do we want to use?
>
> IMO we should be using [hidden email] for this.
> Afterall, we are talking about the Council meeting agenda.
>
> Any topic that needs further discussion before a meeting should be moved
> to its own -dev thread anyway.
reality is that this probably wont work in practice.  cc-ing both lists isnt a
problem and lets devs know that the council is indeed doing work.
-mike

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Petteri Räty-2
On 07/18/2010 07:42 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:

> On Saturday, July 17, 2010 23:47:39 Alex Alexander wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 03:13:22AM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>>> I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
>>> Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
>>> ML do we want to use?
>>
>> IMO we should be using [hidden email] for this.
>> Afterall, we are talking about the Council meeting agenda.
>>
>> Any topic that needs further discussion before a meeting should be moved
>> to its own -dev thread anyway.
>
> reality is that this probably wont work in practice.  cc-ing both lists isnt a
> problem and lets devs know that the council is indeed doing work.
> -mike
Cross posting is annoying if you are on both lists and can lead to the
fragmentation of the thread. There should only be one list (+
dev-announce for the initial post if needed).

Regards,
Petteri


signature.asc (918 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Mike Frysinger
On Sunday, July 18, 2010 11:20:57 Petteri Räty wrote:

> On 07/18/2010 07:42 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 17, 2010 23:47:39 Alex Alexander wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 03:13:22AM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. wrote:
> >>> I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
> >>> Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
> >>> ML do we want to use?
> >>
> >> IMO we should be using [hidden email] for this.
> >> Afterall, we are talking about the Council meeting agenda.
> >>
> >> Any topic that needs further discussion before a meeting should be moved
> >> to its own -dev thread anyway.
> >
> > reality is that this probably wont work in practice.  cc-ing both lists
> > isnt a problem and lets devs know that the council is indeed doing work.
>
> Cross posting is annoying if you are on both lists and can lead to the
> fragmentation of the thread.
get a real mail client then.  any modern one worth using handles duplicate
mail ids just fine.
-mike

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Petteri Räty-2
On 07/18/2010 10:37 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:

> On Sunday, July 18, 2010 11:20:57 Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 07/18/2010 07:42 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Saturday, July 17, 2010 23:47:39 Alex Alexander wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 03:13:22AM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. wrote:
>>>>> I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
>>>>> Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
>>>>> ML do we want to use?
>>>>
>>>> IMO we should be using [hidden email] for this.
>>>> Afterall, we are talking about the Council meeting agenda.
>>>>
>>>> Any topic that needs further discussion before a meeting should be moved
>>>> to its own -dev thread anyway.
>>>
>>> reality is that this probably wont work in practice.  cc-ing both lists
>>> isnt a problem and lets devs know that the council is indeed doing work.
>>
>> Cross posting is annoying if you are on both lists and can lead to the
>> fragmentation of the thread.
>
> get a real mail client then.  any modern one worth using handles duplicate
> mail ids just fine.
> -mike
Yes the first can be worked around (although archives still have
multiple copies). The second is a worse problem in my opinion. The
current rules are not to cross post. If you are not happy with them you
should start a thread on changing them.

Regards,
Petteri


signature.asc (918 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Mike Frysinger
On Sunday, July 18, 2010 15:51:11 Petteri Räty wrote:

> On 07/18/2010 10:37 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 18, 2010 11:20:57 Petteri Räty wrote:
> >> On 07/18/2010 07:42 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, July 17, 2010 23:47:39 Alex Alexander wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 03:13:22AM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. wrote:
> >>>>> I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls
> >>>>> as Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter.
> >>>>> Which ML do we want to use?
> >>>>
> >>>> IMO we should be using [hidden email] for this.
> >>>> Afterall, we are talking about the Council meeting agenda.
> >>>>
> >>>> Any topic that needs further discussion before a meeting should be
> >>>> moved to its own -dev thread anyway.
> >>>
> >>> reality is that this probably wont work in practice.  cc-ing both lists
> >>> isnt a problem and lets devs know that the council is indeed doing
> >>> work.
> >>
> >> Cross posting is annoying if you are on both lists and can lead to the
> >> fragmentation of the thread.
> >
> > get a real mail client then.  any modern one worth using handles
> > duplicate mail ids just fine.
>
> Yes the first can be worked around (although archives still have
> multiple copies). The second is a worse problem in my opinion. The
> current rules are not to cross post. If you are not happy with them you
> should start a thread on changing them.
there was a debate on the issue, but there was never a clear edict on it.  so
dont quote the situation as if there was.
-mike

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Petteri Räty-2
In reply to this post by Alex Alexander
On 07/18/2010 06:47 AM, Alex Alexander wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 03:13:22AM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>> I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
>> Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
>> ML do we want to use?
>
> IMO we should be using [hidden email] for this.
> Afterall, we are talking about the Council meeting agenda.
>

I have advocated shutting down this mailing list because usually the
threads could as well be handled on gentoo-dev or gentoo-project (would
start to have more use for gentoo-project). Maybe this council is
supportive of the idea.

Regards,
Petteri


signature.asc (918 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Petteri Räty-2
In reply to this post by Mike Frysinger
On 07/18/2010 11:02 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:

>
> there was a debate on the issue, but there was never a clear edict on it.  so
> dont quote the situation as if there was.
> -mike

Currently it's only hinted by http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html that's
linked from http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/lists.xml but of course
getting the link there is my doing. I will start a thread on
gentoo-project so we can add a clear statement to the FAQ.

Regards,
Petteri


signature.asc (918 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Brian Harring-2
In reply to this post by Petteri Räty-2
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:06:15PM +0300, Petteri RRRty wrote:

> On 07/18/2010 06:47 AM, Alex Alexander wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 03:13:22AM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> >> I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
> >> Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
> >> ML do we want to use?
> >
> > IMO we should be using [hidden email] for this.
> > Afterall, we are talking about the Council meeting agenda.
> >
>
> I have advocated shutting down this mailing list because usually the
> threads could as well be handled on gentoo-dev or gentoo-project (would
> start to have more use for gentoo-project). Maybe this council is
> supportive of the idea.
From my standpoint, -project was created purely to bannish threads of
pointless bickering to; -council theoretically *should* serve a
purpose, but the cross posting crap really limits that.

I'm well aware there are RFC's out there, and some folk w/ strong
opinions that cross posting is the path to hell- that said it's *very*
useful for getting folks attention, keeping people in the loop.

If there is to be no cross posting, then -council ml is kind of
worthless.  As for -project... from a growth standpoint we probably
need to keep the two seperate although I personally do not find that
divide to be useful.

My 2 cents, as it were.
~harring

attachment0 (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Petteri Räty-2
On 07/18/2010 11:24 PM, Brian Harring wrote:

>
> I'm well aware there are RFC's out there, and some folk w/ strong
> opinions that cross posting is the path to hell- that said it's *very*
> useful for getting folks attention, keeping people in the loop.
>

For getting attention we have gentoo-dev-announce. Is there something
you consider problematic with that approach?

Regards,
Petteri


signature.asc (918 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

Mike Frysinger
In reply to this post by Petteri Räty-2
On Sunday, July 18, 2010 16:18:36 Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 07/18/2010 11:02 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > there was a debate on the issue, but there was never a clear edict on it.
> >  so dont quote the situation as if there was.
>
> Currently it's only hinted by http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html that's
> linked from http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/lists.xml but of course
> getting the link there is my doing. I will start a thread on
> gentoo-project so we can add a clear statement to the FAQ.

thanks
-mike

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment