From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08875139083 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 08:29:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CDB49E0FE3; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 08:29:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85BBEE0F47 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 08:29:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot (d202-252.icpnet.pl [109.173.202.252]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F3CB33BF0B; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 08:29:21 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1512894558.1612.11.camel@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Agenda for the council meeting 2017-12-10 18:00 UTC From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:29:18 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20171209230336.5dcee2e1@professor-x> References: <16099994.eYkbcOoAGA@pinacolada> <20171209230336.5dcee2e1@professor-x> Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.24.5 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 7ea0bc35-ef4e-4da7-ad57-d1ca4385e129 X-Archives-Hash: e99b2480c5f1a956d3da81a5a5e31420 W dniu sob, 09.12.2017 o godzinie 23∶25 -0800, użytkownik Brian Dolbec napisał: > On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 23:21:57 +0000 > "Robin H. Johnson" wrote: > > > I did wish to participate re two items here, but regretfully I will be > > travelling at the time, and it's unlikely that I will have > > connectivity. > > > > On Sat, Dec 09, 2017 at 08:39:54PM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > > 3. Final review of GLEP 74 [4,5] > > > -------------------------------- > > > Full-tree verification using Manifest files > > > > The implementation is done, some tweaks were made since the previous > > month's version. > > > > > 4. Restricting gentoo-dev/-project posting [6] > > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > * Restricting posting to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-project, while > > > creating a gentoo-experts list? > > > * Restricting posting to gentoo-dev and moving all official > > > business there? > > > * Restricting posting to gentoo-dev and moving all official > > > business to a revived restricted gentoo-council list? > > > * Moderating lists instead? > > > > I had not weighed in publicly on this before, but wish to make a > > statement. > > The original split of gentoo-dev to gentoo-project included > > moderation of gentoo-dev, however that was never really implemented, > > mostly for technical reasons, and a decreased need after the split. > > > > I oppose a further split of -dev/-project/-experts, and instead > > propose better list policies of -dev. If it's technical, even coming > > from an expert user, it probably belongs on -dev. If it's about the > > organizational structures of Gentoo, it belongs on -project. > > How do we keep the threads more on-topic? Moderation maybe, but I'm > > not convinced that is best. > > > > > > > I second this. I too do not want to see the lists split even further. > There are far too many interested and competent users in it that can > and do contribute in some ways. There has to be a better solution. > > > Also: > > 1. Lack of enough package maintainers [1] > ----------------------------------------- > Anything that can be done? > > > I am intending to set up a buildbot instance and develop some builder > scripts for it to aid in regular package maintenance. It should be > able to do basic version bumps and run the test suite, present it to the > pkg maintainers for final Q/A and pushes to the tree. It should also be > able to check/test on whatever arches that have a worker connected to > it. So this should help take some of the pressure off the various arch > teams. My first goal is for it to do many of the python pkgs I > maintain to get the basic system up and running. Plus I should be able > to leverage some of the g-sorcery/gs-pypi code. Once operational, it > should be possible to add additional parsers to check for and update > dependencies to add additional types of pkgs to its capabilities. > I hope you don't mean to bump packages without checking for changed dependencies and other important build system changes. -- Best regards, Michał Górny