From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MmcSZ-0001b4-GM for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:56:51 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 97FEBE0789; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:56:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648ADE0789 for ; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:56:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.15] (bl9-45-81.dsl.telepac.pt [85.242.45.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83E62672BB for ; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:56:49 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4AAC352A.50008@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:56:26 +0000 From: "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090830) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Agenda for September 14th meeting References: <1252757649.6044.5.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> <20090912160801.2d679976@snowcone> In-Reply-To: <20090912160801.2d679976@snowcone> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 739ecc59-09f2-4642-9358-df1a97588225 X-Archives-Hash: e2d58b91366848c5c22468c4a6fa8457 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:14:09 +0200 > Tobias Scherbaum wrote: >> 3. EAPI/PMS (30 Minutes) >> >> 3.1. A process to modify PMS standard that doesn't directly involve >> the EAPI process. >> As requested by "Joshua Jackson" / User >> relations: Required people: tsuname, ulm >> >> "Per bug http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=273261 I'm requesting >> an AOB for the decision that was made by the PMS team about a process >> or system to modify the PMS standard that doesn't directly involve >> the EAPI process currently. >> >> I've set the hard date for them for the sept 10th meeting and this >> gives them 3 weeks to work on this so it should be no issue for them >> to come to this. I'm expecting them to be able to have a result by >> then." > > I asked Joshua to retract this request because he was basing it on the > mistaken impression that profiles weren't EAPI controlled (the Council > voted to put profiles under EAPI control a while ago). Unfortunately he > hasn't responded, so instead I'll ask the Council to disregard this > since between the EAPI mechanism and the way we've used previously of > not introducing changes that will break older things (by not reusing > names, and not requiring support except on EAPI change) we've already > got the whole thing covered. > Ciaran, it isn't a "mistaken impression". Both Joshua and me think there are alternatives and that the choice to put profiles/* under EAPI was unfortunate and should be reviewed. It's also my opinion that what the council approved was the use of a EAPI file under each profile to mark the type of atoms that can be used in the profile files (slots, etc). - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / SPARC / KDE -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkqsNSoACgkQcAWygvVEyAIrNgCcCGPWrj68Om56L3+vxpwnxWmF VGwAnj+m1ay8F84C9YDBumJQu7Ihv9iQ =osL8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----