Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Upcoming council meeting - Tuesday, 1st of February, 2000 UTC

[Petteri Räty]

On 01/26/2011 10:19 AM, Torsten Veller wrote:
> * Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o>:
>> On 01/26/2011 08:50 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>>> On 1/26/11 3:33 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>>>> Meeting agenda:
>>>>  * GLEP 48 (QA)
>>>
>> I think we should apply the same rules to GLEP changes as to new GLEPs.
>> Then we have this coming from GLEP 1:
>>
>> "GLEP authors are responsible for collecting community feedback on a
>> GLEP before submitting it for review. A GLEP that has not been discussed
>> on gentoo-dev@g.o and/or the Gentoo Linux forums [7] will not be
>> accepted"
>>
>> As the GLEP predates gentoo-project I think this mailing list is proper
>> too. Paweł's comment shows that just a gentoo-qa mailing will not get
>> you enough exposure to ensure the wider community has had a chance to
>> comment on the changes. For this reason I think the item should be
>> postponed to the next meeting.
>
> I agree. Let's give the community a chance to comment.
>
> I also see the downside of the GLEP process:
> If you run "Developer Relations" - a project not being backed up by a
> GLEP - you can change the policy as you like and don't have to ask for
> feedback from the community at all [1].
>

That document was eventually approved by the council and I don't plan on
doing major modifications on my own. But there's a good point here in
that it's probably a good idea to turn that document into a GLEP.

> I hope we can agree that feedback is good -- required by the GLEP
> process or not.
>

Indeed.

Regards,
Petteri