Re: [gentoo-dev] New projects

[Alec Warner]

Glep 54 now replaces (and depends on) glep 39.

Like the commit message says, the spirit of the glep was approved long
ago, if you have issues with wording please to be taking it up with me
so we can make it pretty (particularly the backwards compatibility
section)

-Love antarus

On 10/11/07, Alec Warner <antarus@×××××××××××.com> wrote:
> On 10/11/07, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@g.o> wrote:
> > Alec Warner wrote:
> > > On 10/11/07, Torsten Veller <tove@g.o> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Last council decided:
> > >>
> > >> | Design phase for new projects: New projects need to post an RFC
> > >> |   containing information about their goals, the plan on how to
> > >> |   implement their goals and the necessary resources to -dev prior to
> > >> |   creating the project.
> > >> |
> > >> |   This proposal was accepted with 6 members voting yes and one member
> > >> |   abstained from voting
> > >> <http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20061019-summary.txt>
> > >>
> > >> GLEP 39 was not updated and still says:
> > >>
> > >> | Any dev may create a new project just by creating a new page (or, more
> > >> | realistically, directory and page) in gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en."
> > >> <http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.html>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> This week two new subdirs were added to proj/en.
> > >> (One was just added for an "existing" project.)
> > >>
> > >> Can the glepeditors update GLEP 39 to reflect the coucil decision?
> > >> Maybe a new project should also be announced in -dev-announce (and GWN
> > >> if they want to).
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'll get to that now.
> > >
> > > -Alec
> > >
> > Shouldn't it really be a new GLEP that replaced the old GLEP 39? Since
> > the way the GLEP system works, i.e. obsoleted by GLEP ## and we
> > typically don't edit them once their out of draft status.
>
> Details details
>
> >
> > --
> > gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
> >
> >
>
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list