List Archive: gentoo-dev
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
Corey Shields wrote:
>>Before deciding on such proposals, it might be also wise to consult infra
>>people who'll have to implement and maintain such things, IMHO. And, how
>>exactly will be people having multiple roles handled here - still missing a
> Jakub++ Nobody in infra is on board with this idea, so you will be hard
> pressed to find someone willing to implement it.
What I find disturbing here is that nobody found the issue interesting
enough to read the October Council decisions as to what was needed to be
changed for the GLEP to be approved. But when, one month later, those
requirements have been met and the GLEP approved, lots of people
discover that the issue is interesting and complain about it (when it's
a little too late to be changed).
I'm losing faith in Gentoo. When the GLEP was first discussed, the
general mood was that we shouldn't give ATs the same powers than we give
to devs (in particular, no right to vote for the Council), and in
consequence a need to tell them apart. The Council rejected the proposed
GLEP in that sense. Now, the mood is like the Council want to yellowstar
some part of our contributors... and the discussion happen on the same list.
You can't just ignore the discussion and the iterim decisions and
complain afterwards when the decision is taken.
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list