Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2019-07-21
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 15:48:30
Message-Id: 20190710154824.GB3035@whubbs1.dev.av1.gaikai.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2019-07-21 by Michael Everitt
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 03:07:21PM +0100, Michael Everitt wrote:
> On 10/07/19 14:55, William Hubbs wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 11:28:50AM +0200, Lars Wendler wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> On Sun, 07 Jul 2019 23:00:01 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > >> > > *snip* > > > >>> My second agenda item is: removing posting restrictions from gentoo-dev > >>> mailing list. > >>> > >>> I was on the Council that made those changes, and from retrospective I > >>> believe the decision to be a mistake. It was made to workaround > >>> a problem with inefficiency of ComRel, and we should have focused > >>> on fixing ComRel instead. I don't believe it serves its purpose well > >>> and IMO it causes more problems than it solves. > > *snip* > > > >> I fully support this request. > >> This was the utter worst decision being done by council I've ever had > >> the misfortune to be a witness of and I hope our new council will try > >> to never top this kind of bad decisions. > > I was on the council that made this decision as well, and I feel that it > > should never have passed because it comes dangerously close to violating > > our social contract. Some disagree because everything is still read > > only, but I'm still not comfortable with it. > > > > From my POV, there is not really anything to discuss. The post > > restriction should be removed immediately. > > > > William > It remains by dint of procedure that the matter should be brought to a > meeting (or failing that, a bug, as a pseudo-meeting) and that an agreement > is noted that this is the way forward, so that Infra can enact the revision > in configuration, with the appropriate authority. > > Whilst it would be an interesting option to do "vote by mailing list" I > think the road ahead could be much more rocky than it already is ..
I didn't mean to imply that we should disregard procedures, I was just stating a strong opinion about the decision. It should be reversed as fast as is reasonably possible. William

Attachments

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