| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Grant Goodyear wrote: |
| 5 |
| It's been a bit over a year and a half since glep.gentoo.org came |
| 6 |
| online, and GLEPs became the standard method for proposing significant |
| 7 |
| changes to Gentoo. I think it's time to assess what works, and what |
| 8 |
| doesn't, about this system. To date 30 GLEPs have been approved by the |
| 9 |
| GLEP editors that involve something other than the GLEP process itself. |
| 10 |
| Six of those GLEPs have been marked "Final", meaning they have been |
| 11 |
| successfully implemented. Seven more have been "Accepted", meaning |
| 12 |
| that the idea in the GLEP has been approved, but the implementation has |
| 13 |
| not yet been completed. Five are currently in "Draft" status, not yet |
| 14 |
| having been submitted for approval. One has been rejected. Eleven |
| 15 |
| GLEPs failed to get enough traction to be either approved or rejected, |
| 16 |
| and are thus "deferred". Do these statistics mean that the program is |
| 17 |
| working well, working poorly, or failed utterly? My personal opinion |
| 18 |
| is that even with the substantial number of timed-out GLEPs, the |
| 19 |
| program is still a modest success because these GLEPs provide a record |
| 20 |
| of notable, generally well-written proposals, which is a vast |
| 21 |
| improvement on seeing the same half-thought-out ideas appear on the |
| 22 |
| mailing lists time and time again. On the other hand, one might well |
| 23 |
| argue that fairly few substantial accomplishments have come about from |
| 24 |
| GLEPs, so perhaps GLEPs just add another bureaucratic impediment. |
| 25 |
| |
| 26 |
| Thoughts / comments? I promise not to bite anyone's head off this time! |
| 27 |
| |
| 28 |
| -g2boojum- |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
The effort required to get GLEPs even posted on glep.g.o is enough to |
| 31 |
put some people off. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
I propose that a dev is free to upload a GLEP in any state of |
| 34 |
completeness/correctness as they wish, devs can then vote on said GLEP. |
| 35 |
If the GLEP author makes changes, devs then vote again on that revision. |
| 36 |
This system also gives power back to the devs (and users if they're |
| 37 |
allowed to vote) and away from the GLEP editors. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Regards, |
| 40 |
Ian Leitch |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 43 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
iD8DBQFCMb4pefZ4eWAXRGIRAktvAJ4r6tZAJyaaxtkCgtYK/qQ+il1KLwCeIpJ0 |
| 46 |
XPhsHBWN0H/zS+JhZKbtWWU= |
| 47 |
=pU/t |
| 48 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 49 |
-- |
| 50 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives