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 233771381F3 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:53:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ACD10E0D05; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:53:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 269F7E0D05 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:53:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.171.43.192] (85-76-1-104-nat.elisa-mobile.fi [85.76.1.104]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ssuominen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CD59133DF72 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:53:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <521DF295.3070801@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:52:37 +0300 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130809 Thunderbird/17.0.8 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 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-09-10 References: <21020.30575.805569.383992@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: df42a201-0e3c-401c-b8cf-79844f72408d X-Archives-Hash: 7774ffaeaebc4eb866a4add4c643ac1a On 28/08/13 14:15, Markos Chandras wrote: > On 27 August 2013 10:54, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> In two weeks from now, the council will meet again. This is the time >> to raise and prepare items that the council should put on the agenda >> to discuss or vote on. >> >> Please respond to this message with agenda items. Do not hesitate to >> repeat your agenda item here with a pointer if you previously >> suggested one (since the last meeting). >> >> The agenda for the next meeting will be sent out on Tuesday 2013-09-03. >> >> Please respond to the gentoo-project list, if possible. >> >> Ulrich > > Hi, > > I'd like to ask the council to vote on the following topics regarding the > 'minor arches' based on the feedback I received on the respective > thread in the gentoo-dev mailing list > > http://marc.info/?l=gentoo-dev&m=137708312817671&w=1 > > Drop the following arches to ~arch > > - s390 > - sh > - ia64 > - alpha > - m68k armin76 just posted on planet.gentoo.org how m68k emulator can be used as an m68k arch tool (build host) but this one is the one that is worringly behind others, even other minor arches, the one that gets left behind alone in bug reports and often have 3 different stablereqs for just 1 package :/ maybe separate voting on m68k, since it seems like the m68k-problem is being dwelled into more generic lesser problem imho :) > - sparc > -(maybe ppc and ppc64?) > > The feedback on the original question was mostly positive. > Most people agree that the long stabilization queues for these > architectures create problems > for maintainers wishing to drop old versions. > The council should also take into consideration that the stabilization process > for these arches is mostly a one-man job (Agostino). > > However, some people raised the point that we should provide stable stages > for these architectures and drop everything else to ~arch. > > So if the Council votes 'NO' to the original question, vote on whether > only @system should > be stable for these architectures. > > The Council should also provide a list of the arches that wishes to > "mark" as ~arch (even if they only do stable @system) > so maintainers are aware of the situation. >