Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: gentoo-project <gentoo-project@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-01-14
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2018 02:55:15
Message-Id: CAAr7Pr-wTvpiLiN0p96MzJJ4M5jYKV=3jt5hDz-hfXzHFWdq4A@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-01-14 by "Michał Górny"
1 On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 5:02 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
2
3 > W dniu wto, 02.01.2018 o godzinie 14∶35 +0100, użytkownik Ulrich Mueller
4 > napisał:
5 > > In two weeks from now, the council will meet again. This is the time
6 > > to raise and prepare items that the council should put on the agenda
7 > > to discuss or vote on.
8 > >
9 > > Please respond to this message with agenda items. Do not hesitate to
10 > > repeat your agenda item here with a pointer if you previously
11 > > suggested one (since the last meeting).
12 > >
13 > > The agenda for the meeting will be sent out on Sunday 2018-01-07.
14 > >
15 > > Please reply to the gentoo-project list.
16 > >
17 >
18 > I'd like to ask Council what to do about arches without arch teams.
19 > In particular, I'm talking about the architectures whose partial support
20 > vapier had been committing haphazardly and that do not have
21 > corresponding projects or aliases, that is:
22 >
23 > nios2
24 > riscv
25 >
26 > This means that developers only see the keywords randomly appearing
27 > in their packages but neither developers nor users have any way to
28 > properly contact the arch team (because it doesn't exist!).
29 >
30
31 > That said, I'd like to propose an official policy that no new arches can
32 > be added without being assigned to a specific project (arch team).
33 >
34
35 In general should we require people to prove a more solid base in an
36 overlay; before admitting new arches into the main tree[1]?
37
38 [1] My goal is to have a smaller main tree, so I am biased here a bit ;)
39
40
41
42 > --
43 > Best regards,
44 > Michał Górny
45 >
46 >
47 >