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 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HZByw-0006l0-DJ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 20:21:26 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l34KJxvj030856; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 20:19:59 GMT Received: from HOUMAIL002.halliburton.com (houmail002.halliburton.com [34.254.16.14]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l34KGfmP026095 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 20:16:42 GMT Received: from HOUEXGR001.corp.halliburton.com (houexgr001.corp.halliburton.com [34.224.35.122]) by HOUMAIL002.corp.halliburton.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id l34KK3xC032279 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 15:20:10 -0500 Received: from HOUEXCH079.corp.halliburton.com ([34.224.34.119]) by HOUEXGR001.corp.halliburton.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6747); Wed, 4 Apr 2007 15:16:06 -0500 Received: from localhost ([34.224.38.205]) by HOUEXCH079.corp.halliburton.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Wed, 4 Apr 2007 15:16:06 -0500 Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 15:17:18 -0500 From: Grant Goodyear To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for April Message-ID: <20070404201717.GB25883@feynman.corp.halliburton.com> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20070401092940.1B4C26441E@smtp.gentoo.org> <20070404193643.GA7174@ubik> 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="wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070404193643.GA7174@ubik> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Apr 2007 20:16:06.0486 (UTC) FILETIME=[1384EF60:01C776F6] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=4.65.5502:2.3.11,1.2.37,4.0.164 definitions=2007-04-04_07:2007-04-04,2007-04-04,2007-04-04 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=3.1.0-0703060001 definitions=main-0704040060 X-Archives-Salt: df693ec8-a81e-421d-8abd-4f8726ffeb1d X-Archives-Hash: fa0c3e6d47bdd3baf1dbad78d37e06a8 --wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alexandre Buisse wrote: [Wed Apr 04 2007, 02:36:43PM CDT] > I won't take this to the council myself, but I think this should be > discussed at the very least: we need a way to limit the council power, > since it seems there is nothing to this effect in the metastructure > glep.=20 For what it's worth, I deliberately wrote the GLEP that way. The truth of the matter is that the Council has only whatever power the devs permit, so adding additional restrictions seems like a really bad idea to me. > I think that when members of the council, who have total control > on gentoo, say things like "I don't feel we should listen to what the > dev community thinks", then one should begin to worry. Someone actually said that? In any event, Gentoo is a community project. If you can convince enough of the community that you're right, and the Council is wrong, then the Council is extremely likely to listen. If they don't, vote out the bums. -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 --wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGFAfNptxxUuD2W3YRAsptAJ464uV5gEoGvJMHQ0bgNPWmOSSVFgCfTRnA 7UQ3G0e1Z5Tecp50kHFErRY= =2Lw/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list