| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On 10/25/06, Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> Danny van Dyk wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Design phase for new projects: New projects need to post an RFC |
| 6 |
> > containing information about their goals, the plan on how to |
| 7 |
> > implement their goals and the necessary resources to -dev prior to |
| 8 |
> > creating the project. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > This proposal was accepted with 6 members voting yes and one member |
| 11 |
> > abstained from voting |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Could someone amend GLEP 39 to reflect this new requirement? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
(This _isn't_ intended to turn into a flamefest. It's intended to |
| 16 |
start a discussion on a point of principle). |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The current metastructure (as documented in GLEP 39) is a little |
| 19 |
unusual; it's a proposal that was voted in by all Gentoo developers. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
As such, as a point of principle, should the council be able to |
| 22 |
change/override/replace the rules in GLEP 39 w/out putting it to a |
| 23 |
vote of all Gentoo developers? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
(As a second principle, if GLEP 39 is amended, wouldn't it be better |
| 26 |
to publish a new GLEP to superceed it, rather than revise the existing |
| 27 |
GLEP?) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Please - let's not get sidetracked about the nature of the change, or |
| 30 |
its merits. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Best regards, |
| 33 |
Stu |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives