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 B4412139085 for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 12:29:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5FD6A23431B; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 12:28:19 +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 3213523431A for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 12:28:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qk0-x241.google.com with SMTP id e1so13061754qkh.1 for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 04:28:19 -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=RQCbAQJS/FQkIbEH1zInxa05a/SHtU5cFfBdxxieZVg=; b=kggVn5WsQOzu2Q/YHgmbiuENSg5v6BUiWJ3AQYxC83Am4ym2jcGwYnsaDXTKSAweCj OrAx1uIe8+nk2KHtZHw65qFrbU1b5zGHZnFw1Lp7jNbvbN3rLPtvYXVnNzVhUCoKxOSi QLOE2Kqz1KrudwOvTYpnJ1vqdmP73CYHq6Jsb+s3LJg3/nzf61rYaKS20n7/LEF8wxey zeIFn04yCNtCxVhfYJcl4TfIDo+Elftyo4d763RnAhqAbQGBdluzpCMZRT5Lf4seTLpY OLlREfpMLYGGNDbTlkAE+SUA9a2cQZ/PpGQ3BfPu4eO4E5dCC7jdMHA6/OOrlisEgcLN 8RfQ== 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=RQCbAQJS/FQkIbEH1zInxa05a/SHtU5cFfBdxxieZVg=; b=FPg877mI3NP/4ILphVIH1p/Ocw9nNGGq8qjMpk8wkDnbglCeY2zi5xU0invW6qEc80 jpMHqamF5auCRWjMwfUSV5Ecgt/1u6SSssLkprlFCzydKyAxPQ5PQSd6LyhE7EFNubPV 2n6VwukaGk5zAMtV0ZYyB8QA2ezMgeWxMfIEownf4bTVKPUQEazUKbRd19vxtaqoymoZ NnOWAOwQcaxTwRtofJlUX0brJ58JU733HutFC9GC0yarTYhdb59cjGqZMHRDpbkngaoY GHuNgYmY9CEzF7icab40Dfv/N+9krzyHMv2FQOEbB4kzFWTFb5SRKSe3Ly1XFBwDairD vCtg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXLSjG14xgnBdcM0ZS9jLj9b0GiGaY0IZ2XwidXEre3lGZURNGirab+TUbd+qgiG4wM4AxXxwQLxlKGHAg== X-Received: by 10.55.101.215 with SMTP id z206mr24856560qkb.35.1484483298498; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 04:28:18 -0800 (PST) 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 Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.16.132 with HTTP; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 04:28:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <22651.15495.626559.462641@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> References: <45576d15-912e-492e-44a5-b7a3e2fb98f6@gentoo.org> <22651.15495.626559.462641@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> From: Rich Freeman Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 07:28:17 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2rPOQrUzIs-CWyhhGolNpDYNccg Message-ID: 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: e753a37a-8c99-4910-9f73-6d415964b8e5 X-Archives-Hash: a216cc2fb3259b10639d6f6d04aafa70 On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 4:10 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jan 2017, Doug Freed wrote: > >> Therefore, I'm specifically asking the council to remove the >> ambiguity in the language and pick one clear meaning. > > The council has no jurisdiction over GLEP 39 and cannot change its > wording. GLEP 39 defines our metastructure, including the council > itself, and was approved by an all devs vote. > While this thought did occur to me, the topic seems trivial enough that it would be silly to have a constitutional crisis over it. All the deliberations over the Trustees/Council/SPI stuff might fall into that category, but what to do over projects that lack a lead? And if we did decide that we don't want to touch it, that basically leaves us in a de facto situation where projects don't need to elect a lead, since GLEP39 did not make any provisions for enforcing that requirement, and heaven forbid somebody take the initiative to come up with one because GLEP39... :) However, I don't think we need to revise GLEP39 so much as point out how it has been working in practice, comment on it, or clarify its meaning. I suppose if somebody else takes strong objection they can lead the constitutional rebellion. :) -- Rich