[gentoo-dev-announce] Agenda for Gentoo Council meeting on 2014-02-25

[gentoo-dev-announce] Agenda for Gentoo Council meeting on 2014-02-25

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 236 bytes --]

I've attached a draft agenda for Tuesday's meeting. Suggestions welcome!

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Council Member / Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux <http://dberkholz.com>
Analyst, RedMonk <http://redmonk.com/dberkholz/>

[-- Attachment #1.2: council_agenda_20140225.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2775 bytes --]

Roll call
=========

blueness
dberkholz
dilfridge
rich0
scarabeus
ulm 
williamh


Open bugs/issues
================

(5 minutes)

Update: GPG signing GLEP is now draft and has a number assigned. 
- https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GLEP:63


EAPI deprecation
================

(20 minutes)

Based on the summary of our 2013-04-09 meeting, we could take the 
following votes:

- "EAPI 3 is deprecated. Repoman should warn about this."
- "EAPI 0 is deprecated. Repoman should warn about this."
- "EAPI 1 is long deprecated and now banned. Repoman should refuse 
  committing a new EAPI 1 ebuild."
- "EAPI 2 is long deprecated and now banned. Repoman should refuse 
  committing a new EAPI 2 ebuild."

QA has recommended banning EAPI 1 and deprecating EAPIs 0 and 3, as 
three of the above votes propose. The agenda additionally proposes 
banning EAPI 2.

Portage 2.1.9.42 (supporting EAPI 4) went stable on the last
architecture on 2011-03-17 which was almost three years ago.

References:
- http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/3303
- http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/90291


Stable keywords on testing architectures
========================================

(10 minutes)

Problem: They're screwing up workflows of other devs

Proposed solution: Mark minor archs 'exp' so repoman ignores them by 
default and so 'dev' profiles are reasonably useful as well

Vote on proposed solution

References:
- http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/3311
- https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=498332#c5
- https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=498332#c11


gtk USE flags
=============

(20 minutes)

chithanh has asked whether QA can make decisions about USE flag naming 
and usage. I interpret that to mean whether QA has authority over tree 
policy.

Vote: Confirm whether QA has authority over tree policy, including USE 
flag naming and usage.

References:
- http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/90291
- http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/3321
- https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GLEP:48


ulm requested that the council examine QA's decision.

Vote: Do we affirm QA's decision?

If not:

Vote: What should the USE flag usage be?

- 'gtk' only (maintainer chooses optimal version)
- 'gtk2', 'gtk3' etc but without 'gtk'
	- subpoint: 'gtk' == 'gtk2' for ease of porting
- 'gtk' is a USE_EXPAND like python versions
- 'gtk' is mandatory for *any* version, gtk2/gtk3 pick which


References:
- http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/3319
- http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/90291
- (2005) http://marc.info/?l=gentoo-dev&m=111212920310822&w=2


Open floor
==========

(5 minutes)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 966 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev-announce] Re: [gentoo-project] Agenda for Gentoo Council meeting on 2014-02-25

[Andreas K. Huettel]

Am Freitag, 21. Februar 2014, 05:00:44 schrieb Donnie Berkholz:
> I've attached a draft agenda for Tuesday's meeting. Suggestions welcome!

Re "Stable keywords on testing architectures":

The proposed solution is only touching part of the issue; it kinda ignores 
what happens to the keywords themselves. 

Anything is better than the current randomness.

Example: Ebuild maintainer wants to drop old versions, looks at eshowkw 
output, gets confused by random stable / nonstable marking.
(Enough people have asked me in the last weeks.)

* drop em all
* just revert our previous decision as we wont push it anyway
* come up with some compromise and define what package maintainers can / 
cannot do

-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer (council, kde)
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/