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 D6A46139083 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 07:25:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BB6A0E112B; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 07:25:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (mail.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 77F90E1112 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 07:25:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from professor-x (d172-218-130-5.bchsia.telus.net [172.218.130.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: dolsen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C94633BEBE for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 07:25:09 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2017 23:25:06 -0800 From: Brian Dolbec To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Agenda for the council meeting 2017-12-10 18:00 UTC Message-ID: <20171209230336.5dcee2e1@professor-x> In-Reply-To: References: <16099994.eYkbcOoAGA@pinacolada> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.15.1-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.31; 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-sha512; boundary="Sig_/ExYuLh+WYf_Y7cVSivQwX3f"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 57daffb4-e4e6-4d76-b98d-8d9ea30fe466 X-Archives-Hash: acfc15f28fc4f8496cffc42e92c895ce --Sig_/ExYuLh+WYf_Y7cVSivQwX3f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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. >=20 > 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 =20 > The implementation is done, some tweaks were made since the previous > month's version. >=20 > > 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? =20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 >=20 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 will be able to have it run on amd64, x86 and arm64 arches with the equipment I have. Plus I have had others say they could help with additional arches such as an armv7 cluster. So, this should also help with keywording demand. --=20 Brian Dolbec --Sig_/ExYuLh+WYf_Y7cVSivQwX3f Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQKTBAEBCgB9FiEEpdfHTggcxw20pKr1+70IcnWCDtgFAlos4VJfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEE1 RDdDNzRFMDgxQ0M3MERCNEE0QUFGNUZCQkQwODcyNzU4MjBFRDgACgkQ+70IcnWC DtgB0w/+KiT98Dird9YLjT6ruFhj6LIBCwelUpA3XU30QV69/5SLtlrPLFp9HFkP qUhFMc3PYftbJ5knB7nnY//89kdivsTW2IIkQ50i6/Px4+7ZB/rT2LWc8KkV2WUu o9CsL0hnbL5CXJtytjeUcswbS8zFsS+Et0zHBRlAYKOSwUkIstKt9ua3HfSk5GWu v5XbSjgz6/1PHtCO0VsgRW1Kj2woG45m8g+hYtT4teKer/jrkDcrxZu/6IydP5e3 vouGvU+tqyXHHGSNzAfGhA85muyUmwOidkK7SQ//6nafBBdfJhQcfasMc5iUJDDL mbEH/U1pDkCOT4WzSk08QcS24z9daCcx1s5spk2B9GTaWOBOXCGemHSeNZHh/WR/ p0qepLtOJLvkv4dJ3i+7WVqOIyEm2S2ahGKYq3W98GyZNCT1KjVIwPoxKU0ENZGl NmXQm2yJt2MtIpRYlb20BsGs18djX5AIksfRmTFzwbRCg7oGx4dZ4Wl/SN3uSv8L pQF39iGUJhnwQzkOZk3UrGosZMfxruslqfVQCosqz6pACR9c3nE65ew4HUYFxsXJ 72k4AV/S4cdXzKcEJ7ZoYHkT+qSHj2ts8KDh+K7cDx7aVQ2zttRsLl4FDyjc3yjh 4DXYq32plqBWXgzcme+FbFrm6x7LRsVTThFSEIj2odTbnVGSHao= =0ZrF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/ExYuLh+WYf_Y7cVSivQwX3f--