Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
Cc: Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>, gentoo-pms@l.g.o, gentoo-council@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] kdebuild-1 conditionales
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:14:54
Message-Id: 20091211174339.6489c086@snowmobile
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] kdebuild-1 conditionales by Ulrich Mueller
1 On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:34:09 +0100
2 Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
3 > >>>>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
4 > >> We can considerably shorten this discussion, because it boils down
5 > >> to the following: PMS is an official Gentoo document, and therefore
6 > >> it's not upon you to make this decision.
7 >
8 > > Alright. We'll escalate this to the Council then.
9 >
10 > No need for that, as it has already been voted on in the 2008-04-10
11 > council meeting (repeating it, as you've added gentoo-council to CC):
12 >
13 > | The council voted that kdebuild-1 and other unapproved EAPIs could
14 > | not be in an approved PMS document. The spec isn't a place for
15 > | proposals or things that will never be submitted for approval by the
16 > | council. It's a specification, a reference of what is allowed in the
17 > | main tree.
19 And the resolution for that was to make it possible to disable
20 kdebuild-1. That is not the same as deleting it while there are still
21 users who have kdebuild-1 packages installed.
23 I shall remind you, the Council-approved process for PMS changes is to
24 send them to this list, and if unanimous agreement can't be reached,
25 then to escalate the issue to the Council.
27 > > In the mean time, I'll give Christian a day or two to revert every
28 > > patch he's applied recently that didn't follow the Council-mandated
29 > > review process, or I can do the revert for him if he doesn't have
30 > > time himself.
31 >
32 > Don't.
34 Sorry, but the Council-approved procedure is that patches get sent to
35 this list and don't get committed until there aren't objections. We
36 don't commit things until everyone's happy with them.
38 I have objections to several of those patches, and they haven't been
39 addressed. If you'd like to address them now, please do so:
41 * When did it become policy to use the newest EAPI for ebuilds? I
42 must've missed that becoming policy -- last I heard, policy was to
43 use the oldest EAPI that provides everything you need to write a good
44 ebuild.
46 * Since PMS became 'suitable for use', we've never committed works in
47 progress to master. We've always used branches for EAPI definitions
48 that aren't complete, and we've never committed EAPIs that haven't
49 had their wording approved by the Council to master. Why are we
50 changing this policy? Where was this policy change discussed?
52 * Why is disabling kdebuild-1 by default helpful? Why not take the
53 reasonable steps already mentioned first, to ensure that the change
54 does not have adverse impact?
56 --
57 Ciaran McCreesh


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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] kdebuild-1 conditionales Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>