public inbox for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Metastructure: reorganization
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 03:36:10 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_kHRKLqATs1uNsfjYMkfYOnJbyu1PH-EvKA+Mni7JdTHQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21104.43819.507319.106956@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
> The key question is if it is reasonable to organise things as a common
> project. This only makes sense if devs of the (to be) subprojects are
> working together to some degree.

++

> Also the council has no power to decree a new project structure.
> GLEP 39 says that projects organise themselves, so we cannot force any
> project to convert itself from a TLP to a subproject. This would also
> mean that some of the language projects (like Common Lisp and Scheme)
> would be downgraded to third level.

I'd worry more about what makes sense for Gentoo, and less about who
is allowed to make it happen.  I'm not suggesting the Council should
overstep its authority/etc.  If something makes sense for Gentoo we
can lead the way to it happening regardless of what it takes
(decisions, dev-wide votes, whatever).  If something doesn't make
sense, then what it takes is moot.

I think the real barrier to reconciling foo-cleaner with bar-updater
is devs talking to each other and general interest levels.  If
somebody is really interested in taking a leadership role here they're
welcome to step up.  If something takes off we can support it with the
right meta-structure.  However, I'm not a big fan of
build-it-and-they-will-come.

>
> Just ask them what they see as their role, and if the umbrella project
> is functional.

++

Would be interested in hearing from devs actually working on all of
these projects as to whether they think there is a benefit likely to
emerge/etc.

I'm completely supportive of this if the devs involved have interest
in making it happen/etc.

Also, thanks Andreas all the same for bringing up the topic.  I'm
interested in seeing where the discussion goes.

Rich


  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-30  7:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1701685.NthhqudeZE@kailua>
2013-10-29 21:50 ` [gentoo-project] Metastructure: Dead projects (was: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-11-12) Andreas K. Huettel
2013-10-29 21:55 ` [gentoo-project] Metastructure: reorganization (Was: " Andreas K. Huettel
2013-10-29 22:15   ` Ulrich Mueller
2013-10-29 22:48     ` Andreas K. Huettel
2013-10-30  6:46       ` [gentoo-project] Metastructure: reorganization Ulrich Mueller
2013-10-30  7:36         ` Rich Freeman [this message]
2013-10-30 13:00   ` Panagiotis Christopoulos
2013-10-30  0:33 ` [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for agenda items - pgp key handling Patrick Lauer
2013-10-30  5:35   ` Brian Dolbec
2013-10-30  5:55     ` Rich Freeman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAGfcS_kHRKLqATs1uNsfjYMkfYOnJbyu1PH-EvKA+Mni7JdTHQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=rich0@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox