Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2016-04-10

[Ulrich Mueller]

>>>>> On Sun, 3 Apr 2016, Rich Freeman wrote:

> What project (if any) is officially responsible for the creation or
> non-creation of Changelogs in the rsync mirrors?  Do they have an
> opinion on this matter?  Would they prefer that the Council make a
> decision?

> I bring this up because this seems like the sort of thing the
> Council typically doesn't interfere with.

This concerns the Portage tree as a whole, as it is seen by a large
fraction of users. Therefore I think it is a global issue, which is
genuine council territory. Also the council has discussed this topic
previously, most recently in the 20141014 and 20151108 meetings.

From the 20141014 meeting summary:

   "do we need to continue to create new ChangeLog entries once we're
   operating in git?"
   No: blueness, creffett (proxy for ulm), dberkholz, dilfridge,
   radhermit, rich0, williamh

Furthermore, quoting robbat2's message from March 2nd:

| Either way, ~60% are in favour of getting rid of changelogs.

| IMO this is a BETTER goal than continuing to generate them for
| rsync, and bike-shedding about what the order should be; and it
| provides a huge benefit by reducing the size of rsync by 155MiB.

To me this sounds more like an open question than as a notice that
infra is going to drop ChangeLogs. If the council thinks that such
a decision is at infra's discretion then presumably we should make
a statement to that effect.

> Right now I'm personally inclined to vote against any resolution
> requiring anybody to do anything simply because I don't see a
> pressing need to impose a policy on them.  I'd encourage anybody who
> wants a repo with different/absent Changelogs to just create one and
> let others sync it as they desire.

Presumably, this would imply duplicating the rsync mirror system?

Ulrich