Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Daniel Robbins <drobbins.daniel@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2007 07:25:09
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting by Ciaran McCreesh
1 On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org> wrote:
2 > No-one is claiming that Paludis is an official Gentoo project. This
3 > discussion, however, is about PMS, not Paludis, and the only reason I
4 > can see to keep confusing them is political, so please stop doing that.
6 Sorry, the reason is not political.
8 > Nor do I define the direction of PMS. The requirements define its
9 > direction, and its contributors (the majority of which are Gentoo
10 > developers) do the writing.
12 But you appear to act as the project lead for PMS. I am only trying to
13 understand this as someone who has just recently started getting up to
14 speed on PMS. It honestly appears as if you are the project lead for
15 PMS, and you speak as if you have authority for the PMS project, and
16 you are not a Gentoo developer, yet you claim that PMS is an official
17 Gentoo project? That is confusing to me. I am not trying to pick on
18 you or harass you but I am seeing something that appears on the
19 surface to be a clear violation of what I understand to be Gentoo
20 policy. That's confusing to me.
22 > > Paludis does not have a Gentoo Foundation copyright, does PMS?
23 >
24 > Not currently, but then neither does devmanual, so it's hardly unique
25 > in that respect.
27 That also means that the devmanual and PMS are not (currently)
28 official Gentoo projects. Any official Gentoo project needs to hold a
29 Gentoo Foundation copyright and be released under the appropriate
30 license - otherwise it is not being adequately protected. I would be
31 extremely surprised if this policy has changed.
33 -Daniel
34 --
35 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org>