| 1 |
Corey Shields wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>>Before deciding on such proposals, it might be also wise to consult infra |
| 4 |
>>people who'll have to implement and maintain such things, IMHO. And, how |
| 5 |
>>exactly will be people having multiple roles handled here - still missing a |
| 6 |
>>clear answer... |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Jakub++ Nobody in infra is on board with this idea, so you will be hard |
| 9 |
> pressed to find someone willing to implement it. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
What I find disturbing here is that nobody found the issue interesting |
| 12 |
enough to read the October Council decisions as to what was needed to be |
| 13 |
changed for the GLEP to be approved. But when, one month later, those |
| 14 |
requirements have been met and the GLEP approved, lots of people |
| 15 |
discover that the issue is interesting and complain about it (when it's |
| 16 |
a little too late to be changed). |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I'm losing faith in Gentoo. When the GLEP was first discussed, the |
| 19 |
general mood was that we shouldn't give ATs the same powers than we give |
| 20 |
to devs (in particular, no right to vote for the Council), and in |
| 21 |
consequence a need to tell them apart. The Council rejected the proposed |
| 22 |
GLEP in that sense. Now, the mood is like the Council want to yellowstar |
| 23 |
some part of our contributors... and the discussion happen on the same list. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
You can't just ignore the discussion and the iterim decisions and |
| 26 |
complain afterwards when the decision is taken. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Koon |
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives