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 1EbjiG-00003s-Dd for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:09:56 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAEJ8Ees027310; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:08:14 GMT Received: from server8324611272.serverpool.info (unimatrix-01.org [83.246.112.72]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAEJ63q9015990 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:06:03 GMT Received: (qmail 19618 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2005 19:06:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pluto.atHome) (kabel@cat0.de@cat0.de@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 14 Nov 2005 19:06:01 -0000 Received: by pluto.atHome (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 14 Nov 2005 20:06:01 +0100 Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 20:06:01 +0100 From: Matti Bickel To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Agenda for Council meeting, Tuesday, November 15th, 20:00 UTC Message-ID: <20051114190601.GC6183@pluto.atHome> References: <43785444.1000406@gentoo.org> <20051114151907.GA7228@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="AbQceqfdZEv+FvjW" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051114151907.GA7228@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel (Linux) X-Archives-Salt: b78c4d8c-865d-43f2-80a1-711a507df4a6 X-Archives-Hash: e5bf51211f1d474a78684848fdeda42c --AbQceqfdZEv+FvjW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Grant Goodyear wrote: > Thierry Carrez wrote: [Mon Nov 14 2005, 03:09:24AM CST] > > Voting > > - GLEP 41 (requested by Homer Parker) >=20 > My recollection was that GLEP 41 was rejected at the last > meeting, although a revised GLEP could be resubmitted for approval. As > far as I know, however, the GLEP has not yet been revised. According to the changelog you stuck the status update saying it got rejected and should be changed into the glep *after* hparker updated it. (And included council recommendations) Got me pretty confused ;-) Greetings, Matti --=20 All your files have been destroyed (sorry). Paul. --AbQceqfdZEv+FvjW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDeOAZfNMcoUhJ7GwRAgkLAJ44LHZ7MzHs2CBNCfzl9hfQLmmAcgCbBS3T xdTYH9J1xwhgzlBDxyHObmA= =etUs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --AbQceqfdZEv+FvjW-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list