From: Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org>
To: vapier@gentoo.org
Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 00:51:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140123005101.5871b6f9@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201401220158.05090.vapier@gentoo.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1860 bytes --]
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 01:58:04 -0500
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Monday 20 January 2014 12:26:13 William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in
> > > the one place that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
> >
> > If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than in
> > this file?
>
> maybe. devmanual doesn't talk about this file at all atm.
>
> or maybe i still have it in my head that devmanual.g.o is the ad-hoc
> documentation and not a policy manual -- policy lives in the Gentoo
> Developer Handbook.
Parts of the policies at the end of the Gentoo Developer Handbook have
migrated to the development manual over the last week.
Those whom maintain it regard it as policy (qa@g.o, devmanual@g.o) as
far as I know, I have in the past also regarded it as such; to some
extent documentation should be based on policy, thus as a result I
think you can trust the documentation to be policy to a good extent.
The real policy is where the decisions are made, but as that's spread
across the council summaries and the mailing lists; that is what harder
to find I guess, with the ebuild policy now merging into the development
manual I think we really should see the development manual as policy.
The policy at the back of the Gentoo Developer Handbook was incomplete,
slightly outdated (CVS part, maybe some other unnoticed differences),
rarely came up in discussions (people often refer to devmanual
instead), ... thus I think its migration to the devmanual is progress.
--
With kind regards,
Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer
E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-22 23:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-20 7:23 [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy Mike Frysinger
2014-01-20 17:26 ` William Hubbs
2014-01-20 18:18 ` Alexander Berntsen
2014-01-20 18:54 ` William Hubbs
2014-01-20 19:40 ` Markos Chandras
2014-01-21 15:10 ` Tom Wijsman
2014-01-22 6:58 ` Mike Frysinger
2014-01-21 15:05 ` Tom Wijsman
2014-01-22 6:58 ` Mike Frysinger
2014-01-22 23:51 ` Tom Wijsman [this message]
2014-01-25 13:35 ` Markos Chandras
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140123005101.5871b6f9@TOMWIJ-GENTOO \
--to=tomwij@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
--cc=vapier@gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox