Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: A Little Council Reform Anyone?
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:44:03
Message-Id: 20090702214353.1644d948@snowcone
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: A Little Council Reform Anyone? by Christian Faulhammer
1 On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 22:29:39 +0200
2 Christian Faulhammer <fauli@g.o> wrote:
3 > > Which groups who would like to be able to contribute currently feel
4 > > that they can't, why do they feel that and why haven't they said so?
5 >
6 > For example people from the other package managers apart from
7 > Paludis.
8
9 Zac's said he's not particularly interested in the deciding upon new
10 features part, and despite that there was considerable Portage
11 influence upon all three new EAPIs. The Pkgcore people haven't tried
12 pushing for anything as far as I know. The option's there for them, but
13 they haven't expressed any interest.
14
15 Incidentally, less than half of the things in EAPI 3 were of an origin
16 that could even remotely be considered Paludisish...
17
18 > What we need is a more straight forward way for new
19 > features...yes, some measures are already being worked out, but there
20 > is still work to do.
21
22 Unfortunately much of the complexity comes from the constraints we're
23 forced to work with...
24
25 > > Really, the only big issues we've had with EAPI work are getting
26 > > Portage support and working around a Council that wants to both
27 > > micro-manage every last detail of every last feature and only put in
28 > > an hour of work every two weeks.
29 >
30 > Discussion of EAPI features took place on the -dev mailing list
31 > involving council members, so one hour every two weeks is quite
32 > exaggerated.
33
34 Sure, some of the old Council were extremely helpful in providing
35 opinions beforehand, in doing the prep work before meetings and in not
36 springing things at the last second. Others insisted upon not reading
37 what they were asked to vote upon before the meeting (or even before
38 voting upon it), and then raising queries, objections and alternatives
39 that were either already addressed, not at all relevant or obviously
40 unworkable. That's what dragged the process out for so long.
41
42 --
43 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: A Little Council Reform Anyone? Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>