Gentoo Archives: gentoo-council

From: Ned Ludd <solar@g.o>
To: Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>
Cc: Denis Dupeyron <calchan@g.o>, gentoo-council@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:46:11
Message-Id: 1248705966.6516.43.camel@localhost
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-council] Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009 by Donnie Berkholz
On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 19:06 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 23:54 Fri 24 Jul , Denis Dupeyron wrote: > > The log and summary of Monday's council meeting (July 20th 2009) are > > now available on the council project page at: > > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/ > > 3. GLEP 39 > > 3.1. Can the council decide on the process of voting amendments to GLEP 39 > without an all-developers vote? > > No: betelgeuse, dertobi123, solar, ulm. > > Yes: calchan, leio. > > > I'd like some clarification here. GLEP 39 has already been amended by > the council [1]. Are you declaring those modifications illegal and thus > reverted? If so, this is retroactive because it changes the past and > removes powers that were assumed by previous councils. Are you voting to > remove powers the council previously had? If so, isn't that in itself an > amendment of GLEP 39? > > 1. http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.html?r1=1.2&r2=1.3
My personal take on it. Is rather that we mostly all agree the council does not have the power to modify GLEP-39 as is. If the previous councils altered GLEP-39 and there are no challenges to it, then I don't think the existing one is going to revert those changes (more so if we admit that the existing one should leave it alone)

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-council] Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009 Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-council] Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009 "Petteri R├Ąty" <betelgeuse@g.o>