| 1 |
Alec Warner wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 10/11/07, Torsten Veller <tove@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> Last council decided: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> | Design phase for new projects: New projects need to post an RFC |
| 7 |
>> | containing information about their goals, the plan on how to |
| 8 |
>> | implement their goals and the necessary resources to -dev prior to |
| 9 |
>> | creating the project. |
| 10 |
>> | |
| 11 |
>> | This proposal was accepted with 6 members voting yes and one member |
| 12 |
>> | abstained from voting |
| 13 |
>> <http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20061019-summary.txt> |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> GLEP 39 was not updated and still says: |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> | Any dev may create a new project just by creating a new page (or, more |
| 18 |
>> | realistically, directory and page) in gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en." |
| 19 |
>> <http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.html> |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> This week two new subdirs were added to proj/en. |
| 23 |
>> (One was just added for an "existing" project.) |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> Can the glepeditors update GLEP 39 to reflect the coucil decision? |
| 26 |
>> Maybe a new project should also be announced in -dev-announce (and GWN |
| 27 |
>> if they want to). |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> I'll get to that now. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> -Alec |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
Shouldn't it really be a new GLEP that replaced the old GLEP 39? Since |
| 36 |
the way the GLEP system works, i.e. obsoleted by GLEP ## and we |
| 37 |
typically don't edit them once their out of draft status. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives