From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JyCPx-00081D-RP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:57:14 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 31ADDE0549; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:57:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E91C7E0549 for ; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:57:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84B5A66B0D for ; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:57:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: 0.49 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.49 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.578, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rOq3MHcXIX9g for ; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:57:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2E4F67148 for ; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:57:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JyCPh-0005Qy-U3 for gentoo-project@gentoo.org; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:56:57 +0000 Received: from 91.85.132.239 ([91.85.132.239]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:56:57 +0000 Received: from slong by 91.85.132.239 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:56:57 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org From: Steve Long Subject: [gentoo-project] Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] Special meeting [WAS: Council meeting summary for 8 May 2008] (fwd) Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 21:53:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1211216933.5605.32.camel@liasis.inforead.com> <20080519195024.3510ba2b@snowcone> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 91.85.132.239 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.9 Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 88dc594e-744f-4449-8754-e5ff9d8dee67 X-Archives-Hash: e863e96a7a5553a7363243f3e1efca11 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 19 May 2008 19:25:14 +0100 > Steve Long wrote: >> No one here is arguing that we have a slacking Council, similar to >> the "bad old days", are they? > > A Council that conveniently fails to turn up when discussing things > that either don't interest them or that might make them look bad? A > Council holding secret meetings and conspiring with the devrel lead > behind the rest of devrel's backs? A Council that simultaneously says > "yes, we were behind musikc's actions" and "no, it was solely musikc's > decision"? That's a lot like the old days. > Saying it's someone's call and that you support them in making that decision strikes me as the chain-of-command in operation. And I note you're not saying that you think the Council have been slacking in the way you outlined in your earlier post as the motivation for this policy. Politicking and sniping? Just like the old days; everyone else has moved on. Why not just concentrate on your Gentoo fork[1]? Or is all this FUD just a way of slowing down the competition? Well it's been working for 2 or 3 years, I can see why you keep on with the tactic. I assume you won't be using the Gentoo tree, with its shoddy QA, for exherbo? [1] http://www.exherbo.org/ -- gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org mailing list