| 1 |
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:14:09 +0200 |
| 2 |
Tobias Scherbaum <dertobi123@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> 3. EAPI/PMS (30 Minutes) |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> 3.1. A process to modify PMS standard that doesn't directly involve |
| 6 |
> the EAPI process. |
| 7 |
> As requested by "Joshua Jackson" <tsunam@××××××.org> / User |
| 8 |
> relations: Required people: tsuname, ulm |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> "Per bug http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=273261 I'm requesting |
| 11 |
> an AOB for the decision that was made by the PMS team about a process |
| 12 |
> or system to modify the PMS standard that doesn't directly involve |
| 13 |
> the EAPI process currently. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> I've set the hard date for them for the sept 10th meeting and this |
| 16 |
> gives them 3 weeks to work on this so it should be no issue for them |
| 17 |
> to come to this. I'm expecting them to be able to have a result by |
| 18 |
> then." |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I asked Joshua to retract this request because he was basing it on the |
| 21 |
mistaken impression that profiles weren't EAPI controlled (the Council |
| 22 |
voted to put profiles under EAPI control a while ago). Unfortunately he |
| 23 |
hasn't responded, so instead I'll ask the Council to disregard this |
| 24 |
since between the EAPI mechanism and the way we've used previously of |
| 25 |
not introducing changes that will break older things (by not reusing |
| 26 |
names, and not requiring support except on EAPI change) we've already |
| 27 |
got the whole thing covered. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives