From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3D401381F4 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 00:02:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 89EDA21C04E for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 00:02:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com (mail-wg0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E23E21C0EE for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 21:37:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wgbds1 with SMTP id ds1so4319961wgb.4 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 14:37:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; bh=OO1gF/2Hq7oj7HX3k2X7U6nVfluKQL3CJnv3vQF529c=; b=zON8c4nnaQqeJSvP4CwdOPj2mefTmCMgJHGlyc354pcU9g6BfeA8ige1WY6iCKQVp0 g0m0X6ElC+Trds0MP/ix30TcetX79eyM5dsKOO5aJADgCMiCPOJH5jAeOcnBan9jLlQN xQuOyx7QMT1Ipy8dVxD+HqzMMVIhksqDApgoh7xhpKmhgUhI6qM8jc3VjOK6T/QMsqU0 nEE2p1r745MmFsQXqU4QK2UuLsUj6KuFYdhBDSLlS/MH621deygxQ/jmW8PxvvFcMTqF jKQbd8ovZj9E8cirh9p1cNgv7z8tMpzAJE+EAM6glQjJbi7csEI0eghLl/xUGPUANw1a Ka6A== Received: by 10.180.78.2 with SMTP id x2mr31197945wiw.10.1344980233716; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 14:37:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (cpc13-broo7-2-0-cust130.14-2.cable.virginmedia.com. [82.9.16.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b7sm35930156wiz.9.2012.08.14.14.37.12 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 14 Aug 2012 14:37:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:35:56 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Council meeting: Tuesday 14 August 2012, 19:00 UTC Message-ID: <20120814223556.780b481d@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <201208142318.01431.dilfridge@gentoo.org> References: <20120807191736.GF49719@gentoo.org> <20520.6784.427242.325755@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20522.23125.717981.676275@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <201208142318.01431.dilfridge@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.11; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/o8uiiv/4r1MjE+mR45th7mp"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: ae85781f-dc9c-450e-908e-84a343bd0504 X-Archives-Hash: b0b5da91c9c0829c89d3fba52d052a17 --Sig_/o8uiiv/4r1MjE+mR45th7mp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:17:56 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > Waiting for a profile EAPI increase seems to be > something like waiting for Sankt Nimmerleinstag (in German, waiting > for the nameday of a saint that does not actually exist, i.e. > hopelessly waiting forever). The only reason all this takes so long is because getting anything done with EAPIs involves wasting months dealing with people who demand to know why their favourite unicorn isn't there yet, why the EAPI process isn't what they want it to be, why EAPIs have to exist at all, why we have to care about stability, why we have to change things, why we can't change things, etc etc. If getting things quickly is a goal, then you should ask the Council to look into reducing the amount of public discussion and concensus that's necessary to deliver a new EAPI. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/o8uiiv/4r1MjE+mR45th7mp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlAqxL8ACgkQ96zL6DUtXhEUrACgixBwvoDZwntZwvU45ASNySZJ xGYAoLraXxdU459cE1EWSFXxU4qGyoQp =VmUu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/o8uiiv/4r1MjE+mR45th7mp--