From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-6263-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
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 47747139085
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 13:15:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8D08E2342E5;
Sun, 15 Jan 2017 13:15:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qk0-x241.google.com (mail-qk0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::241])
(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 55FC3234098
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 13:15:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qk0-x241.google.com with SMTP id e1so13145256qkh.1
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 05:15:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
:subject:to;
bh=D0MuGNQW/3OEaMEV4YgOOv8Fu8wmJwMHL/Cw2asTDbc=;
b=kj6nzjBurVdIg8DCy9E3smbAhU+qfMtMR7GvtFml1RMuCXCbs5yqA+HZ4+ILfLJUIp
kEEqnEcr+Kj8lM/Gq3l9nF8wFW7+Cekq50tbQDGv2GQM9bSLuYTO+Z6nmrynMb3/cNAy
/VA8wV2qern6indpnMFIqDe2kFBwODNqUBF1cPkUGI328QYUfHx/w1cLyZ32EL66Z47j
0XeMKsiK0/OmHjjshaiec9GJ1QGrZ1vL5hWFVZprjvaMFcULhsd6J7EKjeJwzmNmR4w3
JQVc8L0u3ZdYiMQlRb3+BTDTDDAsOszWB8/1JclG+GYihobA2G1b5yaU4Yxw6Ka61nTJ
I72A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from
:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=D0MuGNQW/3OEaMEV4YgOOv8Fu8wmJwMHL/Cw2asTDbc=;
b=hhAo/gJwVrzXgCL/RCNjECN5FuPdNcZ9tIXAF1hyHTNPDACx73gLmvaBTgJpCREIdv
NIs9BWSCGpA3VoQ8hhyIAAdMIRb7hyyLItE1ndeX+KjnkIZJCI/WKYnT8s6TvQtTQ7D9
7kMH5xQ2L5UB41pYwDvJbrazgLyO3VcYaFZ1xOAWZi6K0pwb1ZjM5bAHl+X4h2xeq72l
WhtVwQ/LRXvx5QEZ5Mn0+KnjyDlfPqYCW2XugTrusAx61VShrew3lV4KFsmEwathl31o
2bot9HpRBOV7lEv/atRA+sSXdfYnkenE0oS7CIY85Irw3gVfEH1eZ47sls3LPCHij74G
9oXA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKsIdUl3lhG2TWlOtV5+FV/yei8wSFV1IZr6Qfn9DnLtshOmBRc0zMGL4nAWzGN6WyObXmMsD2dHfL9wg==
X-Received: by 10.55.161.212 with SMTP id k203mr29017408qke.234.1484486133467;
Sun, 15 Jan 2017 05:15:33 -0800 (PST)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.16.132 with HTTP; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 05:15:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <90c70b17-6ae6-47d7-8f1b-32b327a25779@gentoo.org>
References: <CAFyXEp+hudCHRYZUYtmd29thm2XRQ-X0yi92dsyqW7n6rPyujA@mail.gmail.com>
<45576d15-912e-492e-44a5-b7a3e2fb98f6@gentoo.org> <CAFyXEp+crrUTC_ZT7RvPnpUieanL5K=KwAWVG4+1MKdeyORrUA@mail.gmail.com>
<22651.15495.626559.462641@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <CAGfcS_=r6mxPCxmEh=hBq0UuqNF6znAWA3u9KjqS5eGep0hoQw@mail.gmail.com>
<90c70b17-6ae6-47d7-8f1b-32b327a25779@gentoo.org>
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 08:15:32 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: dOn-fBD8Y6dHotoi-5hq2OGFp3o
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_=DoPgq8TwUj5vXEB4x2VJppyuC4YO15R2=izNCC2hKeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Clarify language of GLEP 39
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: 61f35c96-87d9-4c1b-a0c3-1c6f0ad3f4a8
X-Archives-Hash: 6bd16a6830e1ce1fe1dd8af67596ef7b
On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 7:58 AM, Aaron Bauman <bman@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> It seems the developer community at large may need to revisit and vote on
> such a change for GLEP39. Assuming it is deemed important enough to pursue.
>
Nobody is going to organize such an action over a matter this trivial.
I'm not saying they can't, just that I'd be shocked if it happened.
And hence my point that deciding not to take any action is effectively
a decision that leads are not necessary, since nobody is empowered to
actually do anything over the lack of a lead. And that suits me fine
anyway.
I did clearly state that I didn't think the Council should change the
wording of GLEP39. It would merely clarify what it means. And
obviously it would take into account any opinions expressed by the
developer community at large.
On a side note, I think there is far too much tendency in these
debates to hold ourselves to decisions made a long time ago by
entirely different people. When big issues come up people ask
questions like "what did those people who only a few of us even have
ever talked to mean when they wrote xyz" or "what would Daniel do" and
so on. While sometimes understanding historical perspective can be
useful I don't consider ourselves bound by it. Ultimately how we
govern ourselves today is up to the developers of today.
--
Rich