Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-council
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-council@g.o
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
Subject: Re: Resolve unfinished GLEP 39 business
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 08:26:50 -0400
On Friday 11 September 2009 20:38:55 Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 4:00 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i still dont see what is wrong with the amendment process that has been
> > used multiple times in the past
> [...]
> > council members are *voted in* because the community *trusts them to make
> > the important decisions*.  if the decision made really pisses off the
> > community, again you will hear about it and you can take the response
> > into consideration. plus, if you do something really stupid, it isnt like
> > your ass will remain in power.
> 
> I totally agree with you. However a majority of council members and
> many devs seem to think that since GLEP 39 was originally voted by all
> devs then every amendment to it needs to also be voted by all devs. As
> I saw that coming I asked the council to vote on whether it could
> decide on a process and the outcome was no. The only sensible way to
> go forward now is thus to ask developers what they want us to do. The
> other alternatives are not amending GLEP 39 or asking all devs to vote
> on each amendments. The former is obviously silly and I'm convinced
> the latter, although logical, isn't a good practical solution and may
> not be what a majority of devs want.

previous councils have already decided two things:
 - the amendment process
 - previous council decisions do not "go away" simply because a new council 
has taken over
as such, simply clarify the GLEP and be done. 

i dont know what "many devs" you refer to as i see very few people actually 
talking about the issue.  if there was real concern here, it'd be reflected on 
the lists.
-mike
Attachment:
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part.)
References:
Resolve unfinished GLEP 39 business
-- Denis Dupeyron
Re: Resolve unfinished GLEP 39 business
-- Mike Frysinger
Re: Resolve unfinished GLEP 39 business
-- Denis Dupeyron
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Resolve unfinished GLEP 39 business
Next by thread:
Re: Resolve unfinished GLEP 39 business
Previous by date:
Agenda for September 14th meeting
Next by date:
Re: Agenda for September 14th meeting


Updated Nov 13, 2011

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-council mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.