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 649D5138334 for ; Sat, 13 Oct 2018 09:16:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 039E7E08C2; Sat, 13 Oct 2018 09:16:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C57B5E08BE for ; Sat, 13 Oct 2018 09:16:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a1i15 (host2092.kph.uni-mainz.de [134.93.134.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ulm) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 01E24335C58; Sat, 13 Oct 2018 09:16:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Ulrich Mueller To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-10-14 References: <20180930140524.015249f0@sf> <20181011153139.7700484dc6c452ed570df66a@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 11:15:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: (desultory@gentoo.org's message of "Fri, 12 Oct 2018 23:32:19 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: a4ea7cb5-1fd4-417a-85c9-56995a9513d9 X-Archives-Hash: 38f9a3efa9a91bad789a690707343503 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain >>>>> On Sat, 13 Oct 2018, desultory wrote: > On 10/11/18 13:35, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Alec Warner wrote: >>> My reading of ulm's proposal is that it is allowed. >>> Ebuilds "shall" use the simple attribution, not that they "must" use it. >>> To me that implies the simple attribution should be the default, but the >>> complex attribution is acceptable in the ::gentoo repo. >>> Maybe I'm misunderstanding the proposal? >> No, you've understood it exactly how it was meant. > Especially given the audience, "should" would convey that intent more > clearly than "shall". [1] > [1] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt | 3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there | may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a | particular item, but the full implications must be understood and | carefully weighed before choosing a different course. LGTM, especially the part that the implications must be carefully weighed before ignoring the policy. Ulrich --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEZlHkP3TnuTbxrN0HwwkGhRxhwnMFAlvBt80ACgkQwwkGhRxh wnP7qQf9HsS9i5cTxVQA83QG+cP1DbLPFvn3UcbEoDZ7S1juGoI85OqeRLityocY KP+dwBzHIFuVlTFuH8TIeD50VFicCbH+RjdIq8tbdDwLE+V6u3hWNKqSwTgGQBmB 8tYYyCH+02Bsubx4yVMCCwry4MZkmPdmBFeBZzEwn8RmhY2jGceLGGRhPFxAr7AW Kb0fl7SqQ540FWEW2WvruyECabyh2LhIXxocourg0Q1deMDxfX2h/vxrgsqlUHzG mZp0xf6+FEFGFxpUWRb0X3HhK+ZOSu6ZfEN+sTTalrbMAZUtM1tlT5PXSKW1Jq1u 8bU0Iv+tXgk2OunE//3l6g7tz+BVGA== =6Cj8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--