From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EF0eT-0002ND-Nq
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 02:36:07 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8D2UpFa013462;
	Tue, 13 Sep 2005 02:30:51 GMT
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8D2S1qZ019627
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 02:28:01 GMT
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=home.wh0rd.org)
	by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EF0b0-0002bP-K2
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 02:32:30 +0000
Received: (qmail 13998 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2005 22:29:44 -0400
Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2)
  by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 12 Sep 2005 22:29:43 -0400
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Organization: wh0rd.org
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council meeting, Thursday 15th, 1900 UTC
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 22:32:29 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2
References: <4325D12A.5050601@gentoo.org> <200509122203.31073.vapier@gentoo.org> <20050913031356.08743da5@snowdrop.home>
In-Reply-To: <20050913031356.08743da5@snowdrop.home>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200509122232.29044.vapier@gentoo.org>
X-Archives-Salt: b4baf3c3-4e9c-4759-a834-67eda710cb85
X-Archives-Hash: 7195f56b04485003ff0329753d685924

On Monday 12 September 2005 10:13 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 22:03:31 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> | > Could we get GLEP 31 (Character Sets for Portage Tree Items) added?
> | > The only issue holding it back is that a few developers have stated
> | > outright that they refuse to comply with it, and I don't see it as
> | > fair to make other developers suffer nasty repoman errors because
> | > of things a select few will end up breaking...
> |
> | it was approved once already, just retracted after that fact pending
> | further developments in terms of application/developer support
> | (editors not sucking so much for example) ... so does it really need
> | to be approved again ?
>
> What I mean is... Is the council prepared to commit itself to helping
> with enforcement of the GLEP? Adding repoman enforcement would be
> trivial, but repoman is circumventable -- the GLEP is withdrawn because
> several developers have said that they'll do just that anyway.

personally i think this is qa / devrel's area of enforcement ...

once something has been approved by the managers/council, then it's pretty 
much policy in my mind ... it just needs to trickle down into the 
documentation and tools
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list