Gentoo Archives: gentoo-council

From: Tobias Scherbaum <dertobi123@g.o>
To: gentoo-council <gentoo-council@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Agenda for the council meeting of February 8th 2010 at 2000UTC
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:01:30
Message-Id: 1265652078.3824.15.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de
In Reply to: [gentoo-council] Agenda for the council meeting of February 8th 2010 at 2000UTC by Denis Dupeyron
Heya,

I'm getting a headache and can't promise to make it for today's meeting.
If i can't make it, my votes are listed below.

Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> 2. GLEP 58 (5 minutes) > Make sure you have read the latest version of GLEP 58 [1] and vote. > Proposed plan, see [2]: > 1. Council approves GLEP58. > 2. Portage support is added, we add MetaManifests everywhere needed > (top-level, categories, metadata, eclass etc) in the tree. > 3. Old Portage versions still work at this point, because they ignore > the other Manifest files. > 4. Wait 6-12 months for Portage upgrade cycle.
Vote: Yes
> Then when and if desired we can proceed to dropping the per-package > Manifests but that will have to be the subject of an additional GLEP > at a later time (and we do have quite some time to come up with that > due to the above timeline): > 5. Change the content of the MetaManifests to be per solar's proposal. > 6. Drop per-package Manifests from the tree.
Not sure if we already should vote on this part (this is not the scope of GLEP58). The general idea looks good to me, but I'd prefer to wait with this decision until it's necessary. Basically that's what you meant with "Then when and if desired" I guess.
> 3. GLEP 59 (5 minutes) > Make sure you have read the latest version of GLEP 59 [3] and vote. > Note that due to Robin having had some issues with his flight to > FOSDEM the changes in [4] may not be in there yet, but vote as if they > were committed. > Proposed plan (see [2]): > - Can add new hashes right now. > - Some of the old hashes we can remove right now. > - Have to keep just one old hash for old Portage to still work.
Vote: Yes
> 4. GLEP 60 (5 minutes) > Make sure you have read the latest version of GLEP 60 [5] and vote. > Proposed plan (see [2]): > - Can add new types right now. > - Cannot remove ANY types for a full upgrade cycle.
Vote: Yes
> 5. GLEP 61 (5 minutes) > Make sure you have read the latest version of GLEP 61 [6] and vote. > Proposed plan (see [2]): > - (unconfirmed) Cannot add the compressed files in per-package locations until > the upgrade cycle is done, as old Portage will complain about their existence.
In general I'm in favor of this GLEP, but seeing Robin's answer in <robbat2-20100208T050927-931425494Z@××××××××××××××.net> I'm not sure if we already need to vote on this GLEP or if it would make sense to wait until we have MetaManifests generated on our rsync master and have some real world measurements. If people do feel like voting on this tonight my vote is: Yes - Tobias -- Praxisbuch Nagios http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/pbnagiosger/ https://www.xing.com/profile/Tobias_Scherbaum

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature