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 4.50) id 1EP6Io-0004xO-20 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:39:26 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j9AMT8Cm018246; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:29:08 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j9AMQKvu031819 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:26:20 GMT Received: from bmb24.med.uth.tmc.edu ([129.106.207.24] helo=localhost) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EP6FD-0005Ny-Rz for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:35:43 +0000 Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:35:43 -0500 From: Grant Goodyear To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th Message-ID: <20051010223543.GO31219@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <434A5FA9.206@gentoo.org> <20051010213636.GB27341@CogES> <20051010224319.56e2408a@snowdrop.home> <20051010222207.GN31219@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> 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; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="v2Uk6McLiE8OV1El" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051010222207.GN31219@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: 090d390c-0ab6-4f7e-b5c7-1c86152da732 X-Archives-Hash: 65e25b51d54b6eaa660e70391cceb4b5 --v2Uk6McLiE8OV1El Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Grant Goodyear wrote: [Mon Oct 10 2005, 05:22:07PM CDT] > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Mon Oct 10 2005, 04:43:19PM CDT] > > Isn't the idea that someone writes out a draft GLEP and gets it > > discussed on -dev (and repeats said process until everyone is happy > > with the GLEP) *before* pushing things to the council? >=20 > I disagree, but only very slightly. I never expected everybody to be > happy before a GLEP is voted upon, but a GLEP should address areas of > controversy and either incorporate the new ideas or explain why the > authors do not wish to do so. In this way the folks voting on the GLEP > are able to make a more informed decision. See GLEP 40 for an example. I should add that the iterative process, however, _is_ exactly what I envisioned. -g2boojum- --=20 Grant Goodyear=09 Gentoo Developer g2boojum@gentoo.org http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 --v2Uk6McLiE8OV1El Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDSuy/ptxxUuD2W3YRAu+MAJ9n6BbmXp4gSvToKpmuhhRVHj/15ACdFzkj DNTUPneZUCNRlT5reCl8y3Q= =YbIg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --v2Uk6McLiE8OV1El-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list