summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJustin Lecher <jlec@gentoo.org>2016-02-16 15:40:07 +0100
committerJustin Lecher <jlec@gentoo.org>2016-02-17 10:34:04 +0100
commit068507559137060a0e344ae19c9f80cc4c85fd8e (patch)
tree7c97b62bf9cdb3c8248da4230e5e32b5b7d6a6cf /meeting-logs
parentAdd Feb 2016 meeting log (diff)
downloadcouncil-068507559137060a0e344ae19c9f80cc4c85fd8e.tar.gz
council-068507559137060a0e344ae19c9f80cc4c85fd8e.tar.bz2
council-068507559137060a0e344ae19c9f80cc4c85fd8e.zip
Add meeting summary for 20160214
Signed-off-by: Justin Lecher <jlec@gentoo.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'meeting-logs')
-rw-r--r--meeting-logs/20160214-summary.txt98
-rw-r--r--meeting-logs/20160214-summary.txt.sigbin0 -> 639 bytes
2 files changed, 98 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/meeting-logs/20160214-summary.txt b/meeting-logs/20160214-summary.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..574c79c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meeting-logs/20160214-summary.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
+Summary of the Gentoo Council meeting 14 February 2016
+
+Roll call
+=================
+Present:
+blueness, dilfridge, jlec, k_f, rich0, ulm, williamh
+
+1. Options for new XML validation language
+=================
+https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/3ebf4ccf0d4f27d6240888a3100d0d58
+https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/fa05f5319ef4255d3e3fe34da79a2534
+
+The situation of what would be the best option to choose wasn't completely
+clear to the council and the proposing party wasn't present.
+
+Any further decision have been postponed until better metrics are available.
+
+* Which are Gentoo's requirements for an xml validation language?
+* Can both options provide the necessary capabilities?
+* What are the pros and cons specific for our requirements?
+* What are the advantages over our current system? Specifically what cannot
+ be done currently?
+* Which tools are impacted when switching from DTD to an alternative?
+
+Michał Górny volunteered to do some research on the output of all three
+validators.
+
+2. Discuss situation of libressl support maintenance
+=================
+https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/dc5406af670aebc050362fcbd8cd528e
+
+The libressl situation sums up as following:
+
+* main maintainer is currently inactive
+* no team is present for libressl in Gentoo
+* 1/2 of the tree has libressl support implemented
+* a quite solid transition plan [1] is in place
+
+The council shortly touched various topics around the introduction of
+libressl into the Gentoo ecosystem, but concluded that a project team
+is needed, to which questions and concerns can be directed.
+
+Some question which arise and should be answered by the project comprise
+
+* Finish the work or remove it again?
+* Does it make sense to introduce a second highly security relevant library
+ to the tree?
+* Who adds the necessary code to the packages, the libressl team directly, or
+ via patch and bugs, or just the maintainers?
+* Who is maintaining the libressl support in the packages, the libressl project
+ or the individual maintainers?
+* What happens in case of API divergence between libressl and openssl? Who
+ maintains the necessary patches?
+
+1)
+https://github.com/gentoo/libressl/wiki/Transition-plan
+
+
+3. Automatic bug assignments
+=================
+https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/00e02ff494857599633e2bbc30520ca3
+
+The general preference of the council is positive towards automatic bug
+assignments. But so far no working solution has been proposed. At this
+point the Council sees no reason for any decision to be made itself.
+The community or the bug wrangling project should draft an implementation.
+
+
+4. The usage of use() in global scope violates PMS
+=================
+https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/69ed522b3b53de90e616267a77441012
+
+The council members unanimously request all global usage of use() violating
+PMS (https://projects.gentoo.org/pms/6/pms.html#x1-650007.1) to be fixed
+until the March 2016 council meeting. After that members of the QA are
+asked to fix remaining ebuilds/eclasses.
+
+This decision renders the proposed solution for dynamic SLOTs [2] impossible.
+This topic was deferred to a later meeting to give time for an alternative solution to be found.
+
+2)
+https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174407
+
+5. Bugs with council involvement
+=================
+
+569914:
+dilfridge is kindly to be asked to provide the missing council meeting logs
+and summary for the 20150727 meeting
+
+568068:
+ulm volunteered to prepare an updated GLEP 42 for the next meeting.
+The only open question is if the new news item format should include a
+Display-If-Visible header.
+
+6. Open floor
+=================
+--
diff --git a/meeting-logs/20160214-summary.txt.sig b/meeting-logs/20160214-summary.txt.sig
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..45d9470
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meeting-logs/20160214-summary.txt.sig
Binary files differ