* [gentoo-dev-announce] Agenda for Gentoo Council meeting on 2014-02-25
@ 2014-02-21 4:00 Donnie Berkholz
2014-02-22 1:12 ` [gentoo-dev-announce] Re: [gentoo-project] " Andreas K. Huettel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Donnie Berkholz @ 2014-02-21 4:00 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev-announce, gentoo-project
[-- 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 --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev-announce] Re: [gentoo-project] Agenda for Gentoo Council meeting on 2014-02-25
2014-02-21 4:00 [gentoo-dev-announce] Agenda for Gentoo Council meeting on 2014-02-25 Donnie Berkholz
@ 2014-02-22 1:12 ` Andreas K. Huettel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Andreas K. Huettel @ 2014-02-22 1:12 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-project; +Cc: Donnie Berkholz, gentoo-dev-announce
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/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-02-22 1:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-02-21 4:00 [gentoo-dev-announce] Agenda for Gentoo Council meeting on 2014-02-25 Donnie Berkholz
2014-02-22 1:12 ` [gentoo-dev-announce] Re: [gentoo-project] " Andreas K. Huettel
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox