| 1 |
On 07/29/14 22:16, Jack Morgan wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 04:29:51PM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 07/26/14 09:44, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> El sáb, 26-07-2014 a las 09:37 -0400, Anthony G. Basile escribió: |
| 5 |
>>>> On 07/26/14 09:28, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 6 |
>>>>> El sáb, 26-07-2014 a las 14:55 +0200, Andreas K. Huettel escribió: |
| 7 |
>>>>>> Am Samstag, 26. Juli 2014, 13:56:02 schrieb Pacho Ramos: |
| 8 |
>>>>>> |
| 9 |
>>>>>>> I guess we will need to wait for the next Council to officially decide |
| 10 |
>>>>>>> to do this as it will be a big change for ppc* users :/ (I remember |
| 11 |
>>>>>>> their action was needed for the move to testing of some arches and the |
| 12 |
>>>>>>> "package-by-package" proposal for others) |
| 13 |
>>>>>>> |
| 14 |
>>>>>>> Also, I am not sure if any other arch teams (sparc, ia64?) would want to |
| 15 |
>>>>>>> get this policy too :| (I got ppc* because this concrete case ;)) |
| 16 |
>>>>>> At first this is an arch team decision. No need for the council. |
| 17 |
>>>>>> |
| 18 |
>>>>>> (Given that in this case there is a responsive and addressable arch team...) |
| 19 |
>>>>>> |
| 20 |
>>>>>> -- |
| 21 |
>>>>>> |
| 22 |
>>>>>> Andreas K. Huettel |
| 23 |
>>>>>> Gentoo Linux developer |
| 24 |
>>>>>> dilfridge@g.o |
| 25 |
>>>>>> http://www.akhuettel.de/ |
| 26 |
>>>>>> |
| 27 |
>>>>> The problem is that blueness looks to be the only member currently |
| 28 |
>>>>> replying :/, I have checked their page and I see no team lead or |
| 29 |
>>>>> similar. Then, I am not sure how to get the ok to proceed or not :| (to |
| 30 |
>>>>> prevent this from getting stalled and we keep trying stabilizing all the |
| 31 |
>>>>> things). |
| 32 |
>>>>> |
| 33 |
>>>>> I remember from older thread (one related with udev stabilization), that |
| 34 |
>>>>> blueness was also the only one replying. |
| 35 |
>>>>> |
| 36 |
>>>>> |
| 37 |
>>>> Yeah, not having a clear lead is a problem. No one wants to just make a |
| 38 |
>>>> big decision on behalf of the team without making sure everyone is on |
| 39 |
>>>> board. Pacho, do you have access to timberdoodle? If so, join both |
| 40 |
>>>> teams and just take the initiative and let any other "claimants" step |
| 41 |
>>>> forward now. BTW, taking the lead doesn't mean doing all the work |
| 42 |
>>>> yourself. I want to see ppc/ppc64 in good shape. I'll be happy to |
| 43 |
>>>> write scripts to do the demoting to ~ etc etc. |
| 44 |
>>>> |
| 45 |
>>> I don't even know about timberdoodle :( |
| 46 |
>>> |
| 47 |
>>> I forwarded the mail to both alias (as I forgot first time), then, |
| 48 |
>>> hopefully they will review it :/ |
| 49 |
>>> |
| 50 |
>>> Will CC them again to this just now with this link to allow all to read |
| 51 |
>>> the full thread: |
| 52 |
>>> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/92151 |
| 53 |
>>> |
| 54 |
>>> |
| 55 |
>>> |
| 56 |
>> I think its clear who cares about ppc/ppc64. If there are no |
| 57 |
>> objections, I'll take the lead of those teams and see this plan |
| 58 |
>> through. I'll wait a few days for people to voice concerns. Then I'll |
| 59 |
>> start by generating a list of all stable and testing packages on ppc and |
| 60 |
>> ppc64. I'll post then and then continue the conversation on just the |
| 61 |
>> ppc and ppc64 lists. Don't worry, I won't start dropping to ~ until we |
| 62 |
>> have a concise plan and we're all on board. |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> I don't think you can/should just take over the leadership of an arch. |
| 65 |
> Why not have meeting/discussion for team members. Especially since you |
| 66 |
> are proposing such a big change. |
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
> |
| 69 |
> Thanks, |
| 70 |
> |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
Okay, any members of the ppc team please speak up. I'll wait a week. |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
-- |
| 75 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
| 76 |
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
| 77 |
E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
| 78 |
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA |
| 79 |
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA |
Archives