
\summary{2008}{7}{10}

Agenda call: \agoref{gentoo-dev}{2164d07c74d191ad819b24b416e1e466}

Agenda announcement: \agoref{gentoo-dev}{bb3a3a0c1b0acb771a263294a67b722e}


The meeting wrapped up in under 1 hour again. We still need to work harder to 
push more discussion and questions to the mailing list, though.


\agendaitem{GLEP 54}
\index{GLEP!54}

References:
\begin{itemize}
 \item
 \glep{54}
 \item 
 \agoref{gentoo-dev}{c6e4ba8293f50c1e0444e67d59cf85ea}
 \item
 \agoref{gentoo-dev}{05614741b3942bfdfb21fd8ebb7955e0}
\end{itemize}

Several points were made in the discussion. Once \glep{55} is implemented, a 
new EAPI could add SCM support, while package managers not supporting that 
would continue to work fine. On the other hand, adding this to an existing 
format would lead to difficulties when switching package manager. A more 
explicit list of intended features was requested, and it should be made more 
clear what the advances of the intended approaches were. 

In summary, there were numerous questions that apparently were not brought up 
on the mailing list in advance or were not addressed. These should be addressed 
in a revision of the GLEP. 


\agendaitem{GLEP 55}
\index{GLEP!55}

References:
\begin{itemize}
 \item 
 \glep{55}
 \item
 \agoref{gentoo-dev}{c6e4ba8293f50c1e0444e67d59cf85ea}
\end{itemize}

It was decided that this is on hold pending a concrete requirement for it. 
\glep{54} may be one such requirement, but that's unclear until it's been 
revised.


\agendaitem{GLEP 56}
\index{GLEP!56}\index{GLEP!56!approval}

References: 
\begin{itemize}
 \item 
 \glep{56}
 \item
 \agoref{gentoo-dev}{54ee20d2b1d8122370afdd4b3d7aafc9}
\end{itemize}

The requested changes were made, see \url{
http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0056.txt?r1=1.1&r2=1.2
}

\vote{Approval of \glep{56}}{Approved with 6 yes votes.}

