From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBBF31381F3 for ; Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:41:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7B95AE0943; Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:41:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vb0-f49.google.com (mail-vb0-f49.google.com [209.85.212.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E9D1E0804 for ; Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:41:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vb0-f49.google.com with SMTP id w16so2050677vbb.8 for ; Sun, 15 Sep 2013 04:41:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=n4AYgPmKgFIN49SDdiEUSRK+FD55GWCTZZ0jLpc6YYg=; b=vwqleM/Wm6hdAzrA1tf0FmdwsFg1unECQIQmZsRr2D42PkASXfIDr3/W1gkDnMtjp6 GcRFvCXBHdXXh4tB6Ic0OroNobpDq/ZcotgqE6yjrn+YtndjlIhyiyH0cw+HeZ9+jvAE 7/7r8A8DtOYRr1nsmB0UzB94RovhyxtSBpBtVdcBnpyRYkeCSK2uTgIC6i9zR0fjT7om j0XQT3wIyT62je3HlILwXAPidryEUTDnGFIIy5U1Roo0emJW/J3txaLVA0j2UcgDdXO7 nB25CqWhuPwb/6uW2ukHZpRafBFjvI3VhmWorNYl8DI/v+FcvPuhkfSkiQ+Navp0GKyr Fbzw== 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 X-Received: by 10.52.157.134 with SMTP id wm6mr252501vdb.26.1379245264534; Sun, 15 Sep 2013 04:41:04 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.187.68 with HTTP; Sun, 15 Sep 2013 04:41:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <21020.30575.805569.383992@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20130829152248.GA3432@shimane.bonyari.local> <26510047.28Cxrb1Hqk@kailua> Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 07:41:04 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: rivcAyh29KAUkixwmz-1CCew5hQ Message-ID: Subject: Re: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-09-10 From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: c1c4c258-649e-48cd-8987-c74259cf306e X-Archives-Hash: 4d30a0d32505cd3e4ae2c1d6e70b132d On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > > Please don't interpret anything I'm saying as a lack of care for small > archs. I'd just rather see them define their goals in terms of things > they can actually accomplish and then accomplish those. Having a > bunch of ancient stable versions that are just weighing down the rest > of the distro isn't really a good measure of success. That was why I > suggested the possible @system-only compromise - it might be a way to > capture some of the value of having stable keywords while greatly > reducing the amount of work involved. Better to do less but do it > properly. > I didn't really get any response to this one way or another. At the last council meeting a majority of the votes were in favor of delaying taking action, so this is back on the agenda. I have yet to see either of the following on this list: 1. Specific examples of bugs where a minor arch is making a maintainer's life difficult. Please post if you have them. 2. Members of these arch teams posting here committing to either stabilize new versions or unkeyword old versions in a timely manner. The responses to either of these (or lack thereof) are likely to influence my vote at the meeting. Note, I'm not interested in mere comments that people want an arch to stay stable supported (which I've seen plenty of). I'm interested in COMMITMENT to be stable-supportable (which I've seen none of). The lack of the latter is what is going to cause a package to be dropped - I'd love to see every arch that exists stable-supported on Gentoo, along with world peace. This is a volunteer distro - in general you get the features you pitch in to help deliver, and if you're depending on a minor arch you REALLY need to step up as there aren't many of you out there. That said, I would like specific examples of cases where dropping a minor arch would have helped - the onus is on those wanting the status quo changed to present a case. Rich