| 1 |
>>>>> On Tue, 27 Mar 2018, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> El 27/03/18 a las 09:45, Michał Górny escribió: |
| 4 |
>> Sounds to me that you've created an artificial problem to create |
| 5 |
>> hostility within the community, and when somebody asks you to define |
| 6 |
>> the problem more specifically, you refuse to answer. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> I'll try to explain again the problem my propossals are trying to fix. |
| 9 |
> Until gentoo-dev became restricted, all of the stakeholders of the |
| 10 |
> Gentoo Social Contract had an official way to propose and discuss |
| 11 |
> changes to it. As it is now impossible for some (I suspect the majority) |
| 12 |
> of them to propose changes in the official way now. This is a problem |
| 13 |
> because it basically restricts their ability to propose modifications |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Please don't make a mountain out of a molehill. The only change needed |
| 16 |
is an update of the address from gentoo-dev to gentoo-project. |
| 17 |
The current address was added in 2002 which was long before the |
| 18 |
gentoo-dev/gentoo-project split happened (and IMHO it should have been |
| 19 |
updated immediately after the split). |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I would even say that this qualifies as an editorial change that |
| 22 |
doesn't need any formal decision. (See [1] for a precedent.) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> (like you did using the, then, wrong list on 2017 |
| 25 |
> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/e20bc1207eca0164fe942012cce9c543). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
No, gentoo-project is precisely the list that should have been used |
| 28 |
for this (namely, it is one of the successors of the gentoo-dev from |
| 29 |
before the split). |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Ulrich |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
[1] https://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo/xml/htdocs/main/en/contract.xml?revision=1.14&view=markup |
Archives