[gentoo-council] Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[gentoo-council] Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Donnie Berkholz]

On 04:11 Wed 11 Jun     , Brian Harring wrote:
> Reiterating the early request, I'd like the council to please discuss 
> the current status of PMS,

People actually working on the PMS would be better-placed to discuss its 
current status, if by that you mean progress toward an approved spec. 
The last I heard was a couple months ago when Ciaran asked us whether 
there were any further major issues and removed kdebuild-1 from the PDF 
to be approved.

> if the running of it satisfys the councils requirements of a *neutral* 
> standard, if the proposed spec actually meets said standards,

Anyone working on a package manager (and anyone else suitably 
knowledgeable) should be able to get commit access to it. The only 
person "running" it is doing so by virtue of making the most commits.

> and if said spec is actually going to be approved sometimes this side 
> of '09.

This is basically the same as the first question from my ability to 
answer it.

> Effectively, we've watched it essentially progress into a standard 
> that effectively only the paludis folk are adherent to (if in doubt, 
> ask portage folk, my sending this mail is indicative of the pkgcore 
> standpoint)- it's about time the council comment upon it in light of 
> the general view.

I'd like to know what's holding you back from contributing to it, 
instead of telling us that someone else is doing things you don't like. 
Is there some kind of technical barrier (like the TeX)? Or what? Are you 
filing bugs against the parts you don't like? What's happening to them?

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-council] Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1344 bytes --]

On Thursday 12 June 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 04:11 Wed 11 Jun     , Brian Harring wrote:
> > Reiterating the early request, I'd like the council to please discuss
> > the current status of PMS,
>
> People actually working on the PMS would be better-placed to discuss its
> current status, if by that you mean progress toward an approved spec.
> The last I heard was a couple months ago when Ciaran asked us whether
> there were any further major issues and removed kdebuild-1 from the PDF
> to be approved.

he was told to remove kdebuild-1 from the repo and this has yet to happen

> > Effectively, we've watched it essentially progress into a standard
> > that effectively only the paludis folk are adherent to (if in doubt,
> > ask portage folk, my sending this mail is indicative of the pkgcore
> > standpoint)- it's about time the council comment upon it in light of
> > the general view.
>
> I'd like to know what's holding you back from contributing to it,
> instead of telling us that someone else is doing things you don't like.
> Is there some kind of technical barrier (like the TeX)? Or what? Are you
> filing bugs against the parts you don't like? What's happening to them?

TeX isnt a format that integrates with Gentoo.  should just convert it to 
docbook and be done with this garbage.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 835 bytes --]