From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call For Agenda Items - 10 Jun 2014
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 12:55:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_mAwdQax8vG0e7gt46LqnGYmxLsnF=mMfZVUxfLVRgYzg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140605094259.18e18cbb.dolsen@gentoo.org>
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Brian Dolbec <dolsen@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 12:06:35 -0400
> Richard Yao <ryao@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>> I think we should define a minimum amount of time before new EAPIs may
>> be introduced to the portage tree. 2 years seems reasonable.
>>
>
> That likely won't work. Plus I believe it is already set at a minimum
> of 1 year, with the possibility for exceptions to be approved by
> council. But if the ideas and patches to implement them are not done,
> it could be many years before final approval.
I put it on the agenda, but my two cents:
New EAPIs require council approval already. Setting a policy (like
this one - not speaking generally) on what the council is allowed to
do requires council approval. Changing such a policy around what the
council is allowed to do requires council approval. Making a one-time
exception to the policy the council set for itself requires council
approval.
So, I don't really get the point. The council is basically telling
itself not to do something unless it thinks it should do it anyway.
It is a bit like Congress saying that a congressional pay raise should
require congressional approval when every one to-date has had it
anyway.
If we were arguing that new EAPIs should require a vote of all devs or
something I could at least see that as a policy that actually means
something, though I'd disagree with it.
That said, both proposals around EAPI limitations really just describe
what we're already trending towards. The council has already
deprecated some EAPIs to keep the count down, and it looks like in
this entire term the most we're doing is giving a thumbs-up to the
general content of EAPI6 without actually giving it a final approval
(it still requires implementation).
So, we're not exactly trending towards drowning in EAPIs. Just my two
cents - feel free to change my mind...
Rich
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-05 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAGfcS_nydQyxTBw1h0J37o2k7hTRDCdEyy=z=f02geLtauy++Q@mail.gmail.com>
2014-05-29 13:56 ` [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call For Agenda Items - 10 Jun 2014 Ulrich Mueller
2014-05-29 19:03 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2014-05-29 21:45 ` [gentoo-project] Maximum number of EAPIs in tree (was: Call For Agenda Items - 10 Jun 2014) Ulrich Mueller
2014-05-29 23:27 ` Rich Freeman
2014-05-30 0:11 ` Jeroen Roovers
2014-05-30 1:31 ` Rich Freeman
2014-05-30 1:33 ` Ulrich Mueller
2014-06-05 16:06 ` [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call For Agenda Items - 10 Jun 2014 Richard Yao
2014-06-05 16:42 ` Brian Dolbec
2014-06-05 16:55 ` Rich Freeman [this message]
2014-06-05 16:56 ` Tom Wijsman
2014-06-03 22:02 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2014-06-07 17:35 ` Roy Bamford
2014-06-07 20:05 ` Rich Freeman
[not found] ` <CAGfcS_nkawNaJ58cFh1bezQOWe_kNczDfkBC=J0+zEu2chMg4Q@mail.gmail.com>
2014-06-05 6:10 ` [gentoo-project] [gentoo-dev-announce] " Ulrich Mueller
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_mAwdQax8vG0e7gt46LqnGYmxLsnF=mMfZVUxfLVRgYzg@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