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 A5B67138E20 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:40:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5A60CE0A83; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:33:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a1www.kph.uni-mainz.de (a1www.kph.uni-mainz.de [134.93.134.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5710BE0A80 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:33:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de [134.93.134.92]) by a1www.kph.uni-mainz.de (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s1K9XXgR015262 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:33:33 +0100 Received: from a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (8.14.7/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s1K9XXKp010047; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:33:33 +0100 Received: (from ulm@localhost) by a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id s1K9XXiv010043; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:33:33 +0100 Message-ID: <21253.52205.597185.668915@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:33:33 +0100 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-02-25 In-Reply-To: <52F92363.40300@gentoo.org> References: <201402101545.39578.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <52F92363.40300@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) From: Ulrich Mueller 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; boundary="pgp+signed+UEgyUXQ1dYbv8HF"; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 3c142b3e-19ef-40f4-99d5-c9a94e600176 X-Archives-Hash: b2e8c759b08c29f2c4215ea74511bf1c This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --pgp+signed+UEgyUXQ1dYbv8HF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>>>> On Mon, 10 Feb 2014, hasufell wrote: > As discussed on gentoo-dev ML and recently with the QA team, we have > no clear rule/policy about 'gtk' USE flags. Currently there are all > kinds of them: gtk, gtk2, gtk3. That looks inconsistent to me. > The council should decide whether to allow: > * gtk only > * gtk2, gtk3, ..., but without 'gtk' > mixing these two concepts is confusing from a usability POV. I have > no strong opinion on what to do. But we should not do both. I support adding this point to the agenda. The discussion in gentoo-dev following yesterdays QA decision shows that the issue is controversial, and guidance from the Council is needed. Ulrich --pgp+signed+UEgyUXQ1dYbv8HF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJTBcvaAAoJEMMJBoUcYcJzPvwIAKuZMWzVNMVfa6bCy57PBldB OH+0L7MQqRkx/zwP7lcMZpk50ByezT3P+gB2su6WuYTth4E1AVDLYY7muU2G8jQ+ pSoYrgj/dVO93E0NzvdxyCdKkQEY3jyT7kw4Kb6nxYCTD8Q0r05DxTHN/fB9/agy 0AhKIiDxklQoVicwFkzOjoRnkwT5rczB6vHrIWGlvFQjk8ltRDeldvGtITdceLCF +LjHVASKQtPduc+OlcMfYx+LoyAnoc8PexnesAdgX5VaLvlVBXuGeEgAtathWw6H tkZScE98mJYE13zOzvBxwsBX1VD6u7KOmzj8yIc/ocJc/9KD0U4YX+kmLSTnq+U= =zERJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pgp+signed+UEgyUXQ1dYbv8HF--