| 1 |
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 01:05:02AM +0300, Alex Alexander wrote: |
| 2 |
> The Council will have its next meeting on the 26th of July, 2010. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> The meeting will begin at 1900 UTC. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> You may use [0] to find out the correct time in your timezone. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Here's a draft list of the meeting topics so far: |
| 9 |
> * vote on adding --as-needed to the default profile's LDFLAGS |
| 10 |
> * discuss (and maybe vote on) required-use |
| 11 |
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ferringb/required-use.html |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Adding eclass removal policy to the agenda; it directly affects devs, |
| 14 |
and the previous policy (imo) is misinterpretted slightly. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Specifically, 06/01/08, portage 2.1.4.4 went stable; this had env |
| 17 |
saving/restoration support. The original council decree was that |
| 18 |
eclasses had to sit for 2 years- I very strongly posit that the time |
| 19 |
period there should've been bound to portage env capabilities rather |
| 20 |
than eclass timelines. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Reasoning is simple enough- w/ a proper PM, eclasses can be |
| 23 |
removed/modified at will without affecting binpkgs/installed pkgs. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
So the question I'd like on the agenda is basically if there is any |
| 26 |
reason to preserve the decree- if not, punt it. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
~harring |
Archives