From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SM12C-0005uk-Af for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:57:16 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A5735E0955; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:57:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6980E092F for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.4] (d14-69-47-19.try.wideopenwest.com [69.14.19.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: floppym) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4F8681B4006 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 17:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F94462C.9000006@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 13:55:56 -0400 From: Mike Gilbert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120422 Thunderbird/11.0.1 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Council meeting summary for 3 April 2012 References: <20353.41193.129711.306663@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20120408220422.GA26440@kroah.com> <4F833687.4040004@gentoo.org> <4F8503DF.1010802@gentoo.org> <4F85E21C.4060106@gentoo.org> <20371.51767.784259.131892@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig8771E61E5D52E6BAC7CCE9A2" X-Archives-Salt: f2018d66-1d46-44f4-9d49-04724d0b1f48 X-Archives-Hash: 9aa8153e236df81851fa6c3ed950ed7d This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig8771E61E5D52E6BAC7CCE9A2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 04/22/2012 05:28 AM, Steven J Long wrote: > Ulrich Mueller wrote: >=20 >> | 3. New udev and separate /usr partition (30 minutes) >> |=20 >> | See [4]: "Decide on whether a separate /usr is still a supported >> | configuration. If it is, newer udev can not be stabled and >> | alternatives should be investigated. If it isn't, a lot of >> | documentation will have to be updated. (And an alternative should= >> | likely still be provided.)" >> | >> | [4] >> | [ project/msg_c96d1b724cd736702820fa5ff1547557.xml> >> > From the first reply: >=20 > "To clarify, the question is whether or not we support a separate /usr = > _without_ mounting it early via an initramfs." >=20 > I hope that settles that particular issue. >=20 Hmm... I see that in Zac's reply, thanks for that. Unfortunately, from what I can tell, that clarification was not actually part of the proposed agenda [5], nor was it directly referenced. So the subject of the vote still seems open to interpretation. Ultimately, the council's only "power" is to stop things from happening under threat of expulsion from the project. I think it would be a mistake for this particular council vote to be used as the sole justification for preventing devs from committing changes that would require an initramfs for separate /usr support. It simply does not seem clear enough for that. [5] http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_ac95bed78694852cd09f20a0743= 7b805.xml --------------enig8771E61E5D52E6BAC7CCE9A2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAk+URi0ACgkQC77qH+pIQ6R6tQEAuDUH1h1rTehbKV5+niqZLQLY FqPUWF7pkSaAvSO+cZ8BAMB210cEx1LcFVNRtS4oNbytnllwM16onDZh4pIAGJLW =1yak -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig8771E61E5D52E6BAC7CCE9A2--