public inbox for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Council meeting: Tuesday 11 November 2012, 19:00 UTC
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 12:53:48 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121108185348.GB3931@linux1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121108181557.GP83592@gentoo.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2100 bytes --]

On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 07:15:57PM +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 08-11-2012 11:45:48 -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> > >    - approve/disapprove removal of gen_usr_ldscript
> > 
> > A better way to put this is disabling gen_usr_ldscript on Linux.
> > Some of the alternate platforms still use it, so I do not advocate
> > killing the function.
> > If we go forward with the plan, there is no reason the council should
> > reject disabling gen_usr_ldscript on Linux that I am aware of.
> > 
> > This also has to wait until the blockers are resolved on the tracker.
> 
> Do you suggest to drop the point from the agenda?  I'd love that.
 
I believe we can drop the gen_usr_ldscript question, yes, because if
everything else happens, we can just have the toolchain guys make it a
noop on Linux.

> > >    - define timeframe
> > >      * 30 days
> > >      * 6 months
> > >      * 1 year
> >  
> > Once the blockers are done and we release a news item, implementing
> > one of the choices is a matter of emerging a package, possibly running a
> > command (genkernel with the appropriate options) and updating your boot
> > loader configuration before your next reboot.
> > 
> > Considering that we are holding back stabilizations of more and more
> > packages the longer we wait, is it really a good idea to extend the time
> > frame to 6 months or a year?
> 
> Yes.  I don't think it is reasonable to have a very short timeframe for
> having to make such a potentially dangerous change.

I agree that this is a potentially dangerous change. However, I don't think it
is reasonable for us to penalize stable users by making them wait a year for
newer software because we are waiting to make sure that those who have
a separate mount for /usr make a change that we can't make for them
automatically.

I would be ok with going a little longer than 30 days, but 6 months or
a year might be a bit extreme.

I guess I'm just thinking that no matter how long we wait, there is
going to be someone out there who isn't going to follow our directions.

William


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

  reply	other threads:[~2012-11-08 21:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-06 21:28 [gentoo-project] Council meeting: Tuesday 11 November 2012, 19:00 UTC Fabian Groffen
2012-11-08 16:30 ` [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] " Alexis Ballier
2012-11-08 17:46   ` Rich Freeman
2012-11-08 18:25     ` William Hubbs
2012-11-08 17:45 ` [gentoo-project] " William Hubbs
2012-11-08 18:15   ` Fabian Groffen
2012-11-08 18:53     ` William Hubbs [this message]
2012-11-08 21:16       ` Rich Freeman
2012-11-08 22:09         ` William Hubbs
2012-11-08 22:28           ` Rich Freeman
2012-11-08 23:46       ` Alexis Ballier
2012-11-09  5:13         ` William Hubbs
2012-11-09 11:19           ` Rich Freeman
2012-11-09 11:33           ` Alexis Ballier
2012-11-09 15:32             ` William Hubbs
2012-11-09 16:03               ` Rich Freeman
2012-11-09 17:01                 ` William Hubbs
2012-11-09 18:21               ` Fabian Groffen
2012-11-10  1:42                 ` William Hubbs
2012-11-10  9:00                   ` Fabian Groffen
2012-11-10 19:37                     ` William Hubbs
2012-11-10 19:39                       ` Ian Stakenvicius
2012-11-10 21:10                         ` [gentoo-project] Council meeting: Tuesday 13 " Petteri Räty
2012-11-11  8:51                       ` Fabian Groffen
2012-11-11 18:43                         ` William Hubbs
2012-11-09 18:21               ` [gentoo-project] Council meeting: Tuesday 11 " Alexis Ballier
2012-11-09  8:26         ` Fabian Groffen
2012-11-11  8:53 ` [gentoo-project] [corrected date] Council meeting: Tuesday 13 " Fabian Groffen
2012-11-11 10:57 ` [gentoo-project] Council meeting: Tuesday 11 " Ulrich Mueller
2012-11-17 19:02 ` [gentoo-project] Summary Council meeting Tuesday 13 November 2012 Fabian Groffen
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-12-04 18:11 [gentoo-project] Council meeting: Tuesday 11 November 2012, 19:00 UTC Fabian Groffen

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=20121108185348.GB3931@linux1 \
    --to=williamh@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-project@lists.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