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 CAE5A1382C5 for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 13:09:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AF29FE08D4; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 13:09:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.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 67B9DE08CA for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 13:09:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (host2092.kph.uni-mainz.de [134.93.134.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ulm) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 81FA4335D01; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 13:09:36 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <23228.58764.752533.178211@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 15:09:32 +0200 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-04-08 In-Reply-To: References: <87muyt9njh.fsf@gentoo.org> <61beffad-ae22-ba63-b243-fd698c9a7a27@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+ypse5ADiDCzxD5I"; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 25f08c9f-e632-4cab-b27d-cf7138607cf3 X-Archives-Hash: 9ccbc0e981ad4213ac7ad6edd73ab6cd This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --pgp+signed+ypse5ADiDCzxD5I Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>>>> On Thu, 29 Mar 2018, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera > (klondike) wrote: >> >> I'd appreciate if the Council could produce their input regarding >> Daniel's propossal to modify the Gentoo Social Contract >> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/8c8534195597ca34ebb3e3bb0a042b3e >> after the meeting. Mostly because I plan on bringing it up for >> approval on the next board meeting (and hopefully ratification on >> the next Foundation member vote) since nobody has come up with a >> better propossal yet. > IMO it would make more sense to just change the list to > gentoo-project and fix the metastructure before having a debate over > which body oversees the social contract. Either that, or if we change it we should be very cautious not to do any radical changes. Here is my suggestion for the first paragraph: | This social contract is intended to clearly describe the overall | development policies and standards of the Gentoo project development | team. Parts of this document have been derived from the Debian | Social Contract. Suggestions for improvements are welcome. Please | send them to our gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org mailing list. Or as a pseudo-diff with line breaks inserted (since in the markdown source it is all in one long line): --- a/get-started/philosophy/social-contract.md +++ b/get-started/philosophy/social-contract.md @@ -12 +12 @@ This social contract is intended to clearly describe the overall development policies and standards of the Gentoo project development team. Parts of this document have been derived from the [Debian Social Contract](https://www.debian.org/social_contract). -It is generally very similar to it except that certain parts have been -clarified and augmented while other parts deemed redundant have been -removed. -Comments are welcome. +Suggestions for improvements are welcome. Please send them to our -[gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org](mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org) +[gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org](mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org) mailing list. Rationale: 1. Our version is clearly derived from the Debian social contract, so removing the attribution would be bad style. Also [1] explictly says: "Other organizations may derive from and build on this document. Please give credit to the Debian project if you do." 2. That there are augmentations and removals follows from the fact that it is a derived document, so I agree that the third sentence is completely redundant and can be removed. 3. The "are welcome" wording is reminiscent of "patches are welcome". Keeping it because I like this. 4. Avoid the debate if this is primarily a council or trustees matter. Members of both bodies should listen to gentoo-project, so using this list seems right. Also I expect changes to be rare, so this shouldn't add any significant traffic to the ML. Another question, should we add a version number to the document (as Debian does for theirs)? Or alternatively, the date of last update? Ulrich [1] https://www.debian.org/social_contract.en.html --pgp+signed+ypse5ADiDCzxD5I Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJavOWIAAoJEMMJBoUcYcJzn7kH/RdDnhsPdHgHgpBGmE942i1/ uKq5zR09auGjiq53i0zK19VUjEvTW3OkVhdOgoIVVMNoyE5gYdvhIQOoG//hT/7r z/oxVMsl9Qwoo1U342jy7P4fGOcC8SCY8BOoSbYupSm0BbNqHE5Sfq9LAq1cdXk3 Oz3ninpa8EZVIVZV5tVJ4P0rCCFQs82HJnU4aIFEYNbS0QQN3patKAPHHnli1M0b GXmJcElRN93G4IpRMXccW/FUs7adt2oFp5hAz8sMLtKyVDri9E/uW1jlrBtDmXtQ tWXaokkG1QO12KhJVla+IA14lX/SSgbJtjnKQJNvp5KrO6/QrFmAbgBh1waF0wQ= =WvSC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pgp+signed+ypse5ADiDCzxD5I--