Gentoo Archives: gentoo-council

From: Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>
To: Thomas Anderson <gentoofan23@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-council@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Initial Council Meeting Summary for 12 March 2009
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 06:05:08
Message-Id: 20090314060505.GE3442@comet
In Reply to: [gentoo-council] Initial Council Meeting Summary for 12 March 2009 by Thomas Anderson
On 16:58 Fri 13 Mar     , Thomas Anderson wrote:
> EAPI-3 Proposals: > > Note: The following two proposals were discussed before it was > realized that there was not sufficient time to discuss all of > them. At that point a call for objections to any of the proposals > found at [1] was asked for, and none were made.
Could you please explicitly list the proposals? Google Docs is a living, changing entity. Also please add a Next Action section (which I describe below). If you cannot answer it, please ask on-list for clarification.
> Technical Issues:
Heh, I didn't realize EAPI=3 wasn't technical. =)
> - GLEP 54 > Thomas(tanderson) sent out a comparison of GLEP 54 and the liveebuild proposals. > Among those discussing GLEP 54 there was a general consensus that > there was nothing wrong with it as a first step to get correct > ordering. Luca(lu_zero) commented that all he was concerned about was > that there was not enough 'meat' to the GLEP. > > Conclusion: > No decision yet, Doug(Cardoe) and Luca(lu_zero) intend to write a > GLEP to handle the second part of the problem(making the revision > available to ebuilds/package manager/users. > > - GLEP 55 > Petteri, Zac, and Ciaran were supposed to benchmark the various > proposals and report back. Zac did not write the code for portage so > Petteri had nothing to report on this issue. Ciaran commented that > the solutions other than GLEP 55 had a 50% slowdown in the valid cache > situation compared to GLEP55, but did not post the raw numbers or the > patches used.
Could you make it explicit what the next actions are here, and who will do them, although the portage code thing is mentioned above? I'd like to see a Next Action section for any item that isn't totally completed. If we can't answer it with a Who, What, and When, then we haven't accomplished anything in a way likely to produce results.
> - Migration of KEYWORDS from ebuilds to profiles: > Ned Ludd(solar) brought this up, but it came up in the middle of agenda > items so was not talked about much. Some points were made that such a scheme > would require a git conversion, but nothing was agreed upon because there > was too little time.
Well, because it was frankly OT at the time, not brought up for the agenda, nobody had time to plan, there was no goal for the discussion, etc ... I wouldn't go blaming this on lack of time. -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog:


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-council] Initial Council Meeting Summary for 12 March 2009 Thomas Anderson <gentoofan23@g.o>