diff options
author | Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> | 2013-02-12 21:18:56 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> | 2013-02-12 21:18:56 +0000 |
commit | 871e77b74a6bde897a4bc67dac728771f124dccd (patch) | |
tree | a169b892bc25b324314d3e66283ae04260bd65c6 /meeting-logs/20130108-summary.txt | |
parent | Add meeting log for todays meeting (diff) | |
download | council-871e77b74a6bde897a4bc67dac728771f124dccd.tar.gz council-871e77b74a6bde897a4bc67dac728771f124dccd.tar.bz2 council-871e77b74a6bde897a4bc67dac728771f124dccd.zip |
add 20130108 meeting's summary
Diffstat (limited to 'meeting-logs/20130108-summary.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | meeting-logs/20130108-summary.txt | 71 |
1 files changed, 71 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/meeting-logs/20130108-summary.txt b/meeting-logs/20130108-summary.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..576de30 --- /dev/null +++ b/meeting-logs/20130108-summary.txt @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +Roll Call +========= +betelgeuse +Chainsaw +dberkholz +grobian +scarabeus +ulm +WilliamH + + +Stable USE masks in the main Portage tree +========================================= +Vote on proposal "Stable USE masks in the main portage tree" by +Michał Górny [1]. There are three suggested approaches: +1) by adding new profiles requiring EAPI=5, requiring all users to + change, and then deprecating the older profile trees [if chosen; a + subsequent vote on the timeframes involved will follow] +2) by adding new profiles and using USE-flag masking to keep current + profiles functional +3) defining use.stable.mask features such that they only apply to EAPI>5 + ebuilds + +Note: option 1) requires a decision on the deprecation timeframe. + +The council agreed unanimously to vote between the three proposed solutions. +Solution #1 won with 7 votes. +A remark was made by grobian that BSD and Prefix profiles are unversioned as +noted by the initial email [1] introducing the solutions, and that they need +some care and consideration, best dealt with directly with BSD and Prefix +teams. +The deprecation timeframe for pre-EAPI-5 profiles was voted 6 to 1 to be 1 +year. +There was no agreement on whether this is a minimum or maximum of waiting time. +Some even argued that this was a matter of standard deprecation policies. +This period is bound to a possible deprecation of older EAPIs, and influenced +the duration of the timeframe, for some council members to be at least 1 year, +instead of maximum. + + +Open bugs with council involvement +================================== +Bug 383467 "Council webpage lacks results for 2010 and 2011 elections" +- For bug #383467 to be closed, the master ballots for 2011 & 2012 will + need to be uploaded & linked. + jmbsvicetto uploaded some missing data, but the 2012 results and rank + are still missing. The bug remains open. + + +Any Other Business +================== +No issues were raised by council members. + +Open Floor +========== +User johu asked who would document the "one year end of support" decision and +where. The council documents the decision in the summaries, which are +binding. +Zero_Chaos wanted to know the opinion of Council on micro EAPIs, to work +around the relatively high amount of time necessary to complete a full new +EAPI. The council replied that EAPI features simply should be in PMS, and that +the most work goes in there. Assistance is welcomed. + + +Next meeting date +================= +12 February 2013, 20:00 UTC + + + +[1] http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/dev/263988 |