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 1EGKHu-000120-D9 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:46:14 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8GHeJ45007902; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:40:19 GMT Received: from psmtp01.wxs.nl (psmtp01.wxs.nl [195.121.6.56]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8GHbSMP028506 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:37:28 GMT Received: from pavlvs2.devrieze.net ([84.87.243.3]) by psmtp01.wxs.nl (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j8GHgZGk006451 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:42:35 +0200 Received: from hex.local.devrieze.net (hex.local.devrieze.net [192.168.1.7]) by pavlvs2.devrieze.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1EDE10065 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:42:33 +0200 (CEST) From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] first council meeting Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:42:36 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <20050915205149.GB22270@vino.zko.hp.com> <1126821468.23324.84.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <200509151820.57057.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200509151820.57057.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Face: #Lb+'V@sGJ;ptgo5}V"W+5OCoo{LZv;bh,s,`WKLi/J)ed1_$0;6X<=?utf-8?q?700LVV/=3BLqPhiDP=5E=0A=09=27f=5Dfnv?=@%6M8\'HR1t=aFx;ePfp{ZQoBe+e)JOQ8T5*(_;mHY+cltLGq<;@$Y,=?utf-8?q?O=5C=24=0A=09Tm=23G6M?=,g![Q62J{na*S9d;R[^8pc%u\aiLqU@`kJtYl"^6pxdW Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart17890782.vqlzWPrZ2W"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200509161942.37010.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 4cff812e-9594-4a0f-bb97-0ed54ff33de9 X-Archives-Hash: 682c02b21c903a7bbd77897bb0f8ee7a --nextPart17890782.vqlzWPrZ2W Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 16 September 2005 00:20, Mike Frysinger wrote: > actually this is came up in the meeting as something we would like to see > spelled out explicitly ... either as a GLEP itself or as a policy update = to > current stabilization practices > > the GLEP was approved on the grounds that we need an x86 team and that it > needs to be treated as any other arch ... arch team interaction with > maintainers should be spelled out clearly rather than part of a single > sentence '... or make individual arrangements with the x86 arch team.' Ok, I do think that we will need a way for the maintainer to indicate that = the=20 package is stable. I'd be happy to leave stabilizing out of my hands, but I= =20 wouldn't want my packages to be stabilized before I deem it stable. Paul =2D-=20 Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net --nextPart17890782.vqlzWPrZ2W Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDKwQMbKx5DBjWFdsRAjS/AKDXzU9xuk4Wweq4//1FhvsiZb1zUgCeNPVV W1M1w1v71XbkNOhlp+a2zZU= =WK3u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart17890782.vqlzWPrZ2W-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list