On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:14:09 +0200
Tobias Scherbaum <dertobi123@g.o> wrote:
> 3. EAPI/PMS (30 Minutes)
> 
>   3.1. A process to modify PMS standard that doesn't directly involve
>   the EAPI process.
>   As requested by "Joshua Jackson" <tsunam@...> / User
> relations: Required people: tsuname, ulm
> 
> "Per bug http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=273261 I'm requesting
> an AOB for the decision that was made by the PMS team about a process
> or system to modify the PMS standard that doesn't directly involve
> the EAPI process currently.
> 
> I've set the hard date for them for the sept 10th meeting and this
> gives them 3 weeks to work on this so it should be no issue for them
> to come to this. I'm expecting them to be able to have a result by
> then."

I asked Joshua to retract this request because he was basing it on the
mistaken impression that profiles weren't EAPI controlled (the Council
voted to put profiles under EAPI control a while ago). Unfortunately he
hasn't responded, so instead I'll ask the Council to disregard this
since between the EAPI mechanism and the way we've used previously of
not introducing changes that will break older things (by not reusing
names, and not requiring support except on EAPI change) we've already
got the whole thing covered.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh