[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-council] Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-council] Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Brian Harring]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1179 bytes --]

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 01:05:02AM +0300, Alex Alexander wrote:
> The Council will have its next meeting on the 26th of July, 2010.
> 
> The meeting will begin at 1900 UTC.
> 
> You may use [0] to find out the correct time in your timezone.
> 
> Here's a draft list of the meeting topics so far:
> * vote on adding --as-needed to the default profile's LDFLAGS
> * discuss (and maybe vote on) required-use
>         http://dev.gentoo.org/~ferringb/required-use.html

Adding eclass removal policy to the agenda; it directly affects devs, 
and the previous policy (imo) is misinterpretted slightly.

Specifically, 06/01/08, portage 2.1.4.4 went stable; this had env 
saving/restoration support.  The original council decree was that 
eclasses had to sit for 2 years- I very strongly posit that the time 
period there should've been bound to portage env capabilities rather 
than eclass timelines.

Reasoning is simple enough- w/ a proper PM, eclasses can be 
removed/modified at will without affecting binpkgs/installed pkgs.

So the question I'd like on the agenda is basically if there is any 
reason to preserve the decree- if not, punt it.

~harring

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-council] Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 17-07-2010 23:33, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 01:05:02AM +0300, Alex Alexander wrote:
>> The Council will have its next meeting on the 26th of July, 2010.
>>
>> The meeting will begin at 1900 UTC.
>>
>> You may use [0] to find out the correct time in your timezone.
>>
>> Here's a draft list of the meeting topics so far:
>> * vote on adding --as-needed to the default profile's LDFLAGS
>> * discuss (and maybe vote on) required-use
>>         http://dev.gentoo.org/~ferringb/required-use.html
> 
> Adding eclass removal policy to the agenda; it directly affects devs, 
> and the previous policy (imo) is misinterpretted slightly.
> 
> Specifically, 06/01/08, portage 2.1.4.4 went stable; this had env 
> saving/restoration support.  The original council decree was that 
> eclasses had to sit for 2 years- I very strongly posit that the time 
> period there should've been bound to portage env capabilities rather 
> than eclass timelines.
> 
> Reasoning is simple enough- w/ a proper PM, eclasses can be 
> removed/modified at will without affecting binpkgs/installed pkgs.
> 
> So the question I'd like on the agenda is basically if there is any 
> reason to preserve the decree- if not, punt it.

I would like to have the council discuss this issue again. We should
probably also address the issue of EAPI changes in eclasses that was
subject of a recent thread in the dev ml.

> ~harring

Let's add to the agenda the use of the invalid DEPEND atom
"EAPI_TOO_OLD" instead of calling die in global scope on eclasses.

I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
ML do we want to use?

- -- 
Regards,

Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=N+f/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-council] Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Theo Chatzimichos]

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 6:13 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
<jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
> Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
> ML do we want to use?

I guess Brian posted on gentoo-dev as this usually happens with
threads that start on -dev-announce. I'd prefer you to use gentoo-dev
for such council meeting threads (pretty please)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-council] Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Brian Harring]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 585 bytes --]

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 06:21:03AM +0300, Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 6:13 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
> <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
> > Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which
> > ML do we want to use?
> 
> I guess Brian posted on gentoo-dev as this usually happens with
> threads that start on -dev-announce. I'd prefer you to use gentoo-dev
> for such council meeting threads (pretty please)

Generally seconded on that one.
~brian

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Christian Faulhammer]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

"Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org>:
> I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as
> Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter.
> Which ML do we want to use?

 What about getting rid of -project?

V-Li

- -- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkxCmdoACgkQNQqtfCuFnePkTwCeP6EFUtcd33aBlA5ChHtYqIQd
Ve8An3C3BPWmpqgcxX5NFJgU6X7+xcCF
=C8OY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Theo Chatzimichos]

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Christian Faulhammer <fauli@gentoo.org> wrote:
>  What about getting rid of -project?
>
> V-Li

WHAT? Why??

[gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Christian Faulhammer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 526 bytes --]

Hi,

Theo Chatzimichos <tampakrap@gentoo.org>:

> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Christian Faulhammer
> <fauli@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >  What about getting rid of -project?
> >
> > V-Li
> 
> WHAT? Why??

 Because it is useless in my eyes.  All discussion could also take
place here and most people mix it up anyway.  The distinction is too
blurry.

V-Li

-- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 942 bytes --]

On 07/18/2010 05:21 PM, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Theo Chatzimichos <tampakrap@gentoo.org>:
> 
>> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Christian Faulhammer
>> <fauli@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>  What about getting rid of -project?
>>>
>>> V-Li
>>
>> WHAT? Why??
> 
>  Because it is useless in my eyes.  All discussion could also take
> place here and most people mix it up anyway.  The distinction is too
> blurry.
> 
> V-Li
> 

The "tone in gentoo" etc threads recently belonged to gentoo-project.
Those threads are usually the ones that grow the longest. If people want
those on gentoo-dev then gentoo-project is not needed. Granted most of
the time the list is not that active but so are many other mailing lists
we have. I don't think this is something we should have on the council
agenda without the issues having had it's own thread (on gentoo-project
according to current rules).

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 900 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Dale]

Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 07/18/2010 05:21 PM, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
>    
>> Hi,
>>
>> Theo Chatzimichos<tampakrap@gentoo.org>:
>>
>>      
>>> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Christian Faulhammer
>>> <fauli@gentoo.org>  wrote:
>>>        
>>>>   What about getting rid of -project?
>>>>
>>>> V-Li
>>>>          
>>> WHAT? Why??
>>>        
>>   Because it is useless in my eyes.  All discussion could also take
>> place here and most people mix it up anyway.  The distinction is too
>> blurry.
>>
>> V-Li
>>
>>      
> The "tone in gentoo" etc threads recently belonged to gentoo-project.
> Those threads are usually the ones that grow the longest. If people want
> those on gentoo-dev then gentoo-project is not needed. Granted most of
> the time the list is not that active but so are many other mailing lists
> we have. I don't think this is something we should have on the council
> agenda without the issues having had it's own thread (on gentoo-project
> according to current rules).
>
> Regards,
> Petteri
>
>    

It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for 
them to just go away.  Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers 
on the vine and nothing much happens.  There may be a need for -project 
but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending 
threads to it.  Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to 
-project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see 
the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised.

Dale

:-)  :-)

[gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Duncan]

Dale posted on Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:43:43 -0500 as excerpted:

> It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for
> them to just go away.  Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers
> on the vine and nothing much happens.  There may be a need for -project
> but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending
> threads to it.  Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to
> -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see
> the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised.

I think that was the point.  Having the list and telling people the topic 
belongs there is the polite way of telling them their output's better 
directed to /dev/null (which is of course the the geeky *ix way of saying 
"shutup already!"), without actually restricting someone's right to make 
their point... just that they might as well be posting to their private 
diary for the number of others that'll actually read it.


-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Piotr Jaroszyński]

On 19 July 2010 01:27, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> Dale posted on Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:43:43 -0500 as excerpted:
>
>> It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for
>> them to just go away.  Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers
>> on the vine and nothing much happens.  There may be a need for -project
>> but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending
>> threads to it.  Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to
>> -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see
>> the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised.
>
> I think that was the point.  Having the list and telling people the topic
> belongs there is the polite way of telling them their output's better
> directed to /dev/null (which is of course the the geeky *ix way of saying
> "shutup already!"), without actually restricting someone's right to make
> their point... just that they might as well be posting to their private
> diary for the number of others that'll actually read it.

Yeah, that's exactly a thread that belongs to -project and not -dev.

-- 
Best Regards
Piotr Jaroszyński

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Dale]

Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> On 19 July 2010 01:27, Duncan<1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>  wrote:
>    
>> Dale posted on Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:43:43 -0500 as excerpted:
>>
>>      
>>> It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for
>>> them to just go away.  Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers
>>> on the vine and nothing much happens.  There may be a need for -project
>>> but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending
>>> threads to it.  Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to
>>> -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see
>>> the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised.
>>>        
>> I think that was the point.  Having the list and telling people the topic
>> belongs there is the polite way of telling them their output's better
>> directed to /dev/null (which is of course the the geeky *ix way of saying
>> "shutup already!"), without actually restricting someone's right to make
>> their point... just that they might as well be posting to their private
>> diary for the number of others that'll actually read it.
>>      
> Yeah, that's exactly a thread that belongs to -project and not -dev.
>
>    

I think you may be missing the point of Duncan's reply.  My point is, 
when someone doesn't want someone with a different way of looking at 
things to post on this list, they tell them to go to -project.  They 
seem to think that some people are stupid and won't realize that what 
they are really saying is to "go away" and/or "shut up".  Thing is, some 
people are actually smart enough to see what is going on and what that 
means.   They sometimes go away, far away.

Then some people wonder why, just why, Gentoo has the reputation that it 
does.  I don't wonder myself.  I figured that out a good long while ago.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC

[Dale]

Duncan wrote:
> Dale posted on Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:43:43 -0500 as excerpted:
>
>    
>> It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for
>> them to just go away.  Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers
>> on the vine and nothing much happens.  There may be a need for -project
>> but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending
>> threads to it.  Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to
>> -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see
>> the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised.
>>      
> I think that was the point.  Having the list and telling people the topic
> belongs there is the polite way of telling them their output's better
> directed to /dev/null (which is of course the the geeky *ix way of saying
> "shutup already!"), without actually restricting someone's right to make
> their point... just that they might as well be posting to their private
> diary for the number of others that'll actually read it.
>
>    

Yep, I'm waiting to hear that this needs to be moved to -project any 
time now.

Dale

:-)  :-)