List Archive: gentoo-council
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 19:06 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> On 23:54 Fri 24 Jul , Denis Dupeyron wrote:
>>> The log and summary of Monday's council meeting (July 20th 2009) are
>>> now available on the council project page at:
>> 3. GLEP 39
>> 3.1. Can the council decide on the process of voting amendments to GLEP 39
>> without an all-developers vote?
>> > No: betelgeuse, dertobi123, solar, ulm.
>> > Yes: calchan, leio.
>> I'd like some clarification here. GLEP 39 has already been amended by
>> the council . Are you declaring those modifications illegal and thus
>> reverted? If so, this is retroactive because it changes the past and
>> removes powers that were assumed by previous councils. Are you voting to
>> remove powers the council previously had? If so, isn't that in itself an
>> amendment of GLEP 39?
>> 1. http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.html?r1=1.2&r2=1.3
> My personal take on it. Is rather that we mostly all agree the council
> does not have the power to modify GLEP-39 as is. If the previous
> councils altered GLEP-39 and there are no challenges to it, then I don't
> think the existing one is going to revert those changes (more so if we
> admit that the existing one should leave it alone)
I also think that we were voting about how GLEP 39 is as it currently