From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jxkqo-0005Vj-CU for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 18 May 2008 15:31:06 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AFA32E0563; Sun, 18 May 2008 15:31:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68DBBE0563 for ; Sun, 18 May 2008 15:31:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C4666E2C for ; Sun, 18 May 2008 15:31:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -1.737 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.737 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.862, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LIPXKBWuZCF6 for ; Sun, 18 May 2008 15:30:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.179]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A87966FEE for ; Sun, 18 May 2008 15:30:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id v33so1278342wah.24 for ; Sun, 18 May 2008 08:30:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=g+HJ2mgnzjL+i0Pd7ipY78exhInXubKOnt3/HAy9TvQ=; b=ZjIG03K4PnKA5GjDEyUv4xplohfdV2eny7zw48Kz5mmHnpydU3OTCaKm8EwqU6OVDH7xQ8jusgWkSSkU8DM+wOYHXtKQDMUqGgLojSb3HzIskD6pTM6QFxAQZefKkfSyX4NolVmj0u8C0hLZkjJJet0UojFi02XEcP9BcJNnrA0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=krY7yaWnPehBTpMKquvbLJ7/fKnbeAaPwFh+6ti8Ss9rwDVB6bXZQ7wGE+JnJC1nfNBNBtEFdTY/KZ/FzyT+HjKER2zCZ9iOptQlVvf0Crvdg6DQ6eIFTbAKURuYZGzJCPrxcmAeOWSCYbbtNtpN47Gu1Q1m+4uXpE0K7qCvLlg= Received: by 10.114.77.1 with SMTP id z1mr6347871waa.123.1211124626607; Sun, 18 May 2008 08:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.180.13 with HTTP; Sun, 18 May 2008 08:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <7c612fc60805180830x339775d8jf64670bd91c1666d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 17:30:26 +0200 From: "Denis Dupeyron" Sender: denis.dupeyron@gmail.com To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Special meeting [WAS: Council meeting summary for 8 May 2008] In-Reply-To: <7c612fc60805180829w6b36d17bla6d527f76017dbbd@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080508233328.GA8896@comet> <482CB0B2.6090702@gentoo.org> <20080516164612.GA14234@comet> <482DF281.6010208@gentoo.org> <20080516213454.538ce4e8@anaconda.krait.us> <7c612fc60805161611w48d9e134m7437c4a29f33d79a@mail.gmail.com> <20080517001849.4802ceec@googlemail.com> <20080518105649.GC17371@basestar> <20080518160110.60840c3e@snowcone> <7c612fc60805180829w6b36d17bla6d527f76017dbbd@mail.gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: e121f44e68cb57f1 X-Archives-Salt: 2ad4cc4a-13d3-418a-b360-27cfa1dba77c X-Archives-Hash: c9822bd46b64dc17a595a2d34b607afa On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Unfortunately, it seems that people are misinterpreting this I think you're underestimating the people who are participating to this list. They're not all twats like me. Some of us maybe didn't know about the history behind GLEP 39, but thanks to you kindly reminding them they now know. Have you at one point wondered if by any chance they would simply all disagree with you ? > it might have been better to document it as 'The Council's Constitution' > or somesuch... True. On the other hand it was written as a GLEP. And whatever the history behind it, there is no provision anywhere for a special treatment of GLEP 39. Unless you can tell us where to find this particular policy that I referred to as the eleventh commandment. Now let me sum up. You want the council to have a strict application of a policy that was written in a different time for a different issue than the present one. On the other hand, you don't consider the council has enough power to modify a GLEP based on your personal interpretation of the history behind the GLEP in question. We've certainly seen you more consistent than this before. Denis. -- gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org mailing list