summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'decisions/summary-20130917.tex')
-rw-r--r--decisions/summary-20130917.tex94
1 files changed, 94 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/decisions/summary-20130917.tex b/decisions/summary-20130917.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ee76785
--- /dev/null
+++ b/decisions/summary-20130917.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+
+\summary{2013}{9}{17}
+
+
+\agendaitem{Minor architectures stabilisation policy}
+\index{arches!minor}\index{arches!stabilization}\index{STABLEREQ}
+\index{KEYWORDREQ}\index{arch!m68k}\index{arch!s390}\index{arch!sh}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+ \item
+ http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2984 (dead link)
+ \item
+ http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/87741 (dead link)
+\end{itemize}
+
+Discussion from last week's meeting was continued. Options considered
+were a) to drop all ebuilds to an unstable keyword and b) the
+following proposal of rich0, hereinafter called "package-by-package":
+
+\begin{quote}
+ If a maintainer has an open STABLEREQ, or a KEYWORDREQ blocking a
+ pending STABLEREQ, for 90 days with archs CCed and otherwise ready
+ to be stabilized, the maintainer can remove older stable versions of
+ the package at their discretion. A package is considered ready to be
+ stabilized if it has been in the tree for 30 days, and has no known
+ major flaws on arches that upstream considers supported.
+\end{quote}
+
+It was agreed that there should be a separate vote for each
+architecture in question.
+
+\index{arch!ia64}\index{arch!sparc}\index{arch!alpha}
+\begin{itemize}
+ \item m68k:
+ \vote{Drop all ebuilds to unstable keyword.}{Accepted unanimously.}
+ \item s390:
+ \vote{Drop all ebuilds to unstable keyword.}{Accepted unanimously.}
+ \item sh:
+ \vote{Drop all ebuilds to unstable keyword.}{Accepted with 5 yes votes and
+1 no vote.}
+ \item ia64:
+ \vote{Action is required for this architecture.}{
+ Accepted with 3 yes votes, 2 no votes, and 1 abstention.}
+ \vote{Drop to unstable globally, or package-by-package.}{
+ Package-by-package proposal accepted unanimously.}
+ \item sparc:
+ \vote{Action is required for this architecture.}{
+ Rejected, tie vote (3 yes votes, 3 no votes).}
+ \item alpha:
+ \vote{Action is required for this architecture.}{
+ Accepted with 4 yes votes, 1 no vote, and 1 abstention.}
+ \vote{Drop to unstable globally, or package-by-package.}{
+ Package-by-package proposal accepted unanimously.}
+\end{itemize}
+
+In summary:
+\begin{itemize}
+ \item
+ m68k, s390, sh: will be dropped to unstable keywords globally.
+ \item
+ alpha, ia64: Maintainers can remove older stable versions according
+ to the "package-by-package" proposal.
+ \item
+ sparc: No action.
+\end{itemize}
+
+
+
+\agendaitem{GLEP draft "Prefix with libc"}
+\index{prefix!with libc}\index{RAP}
+
+References:
+\begin{itemize}
+ \item
+ http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/3022 (dead link)
+ \item
+ http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/87466 (dead link)
+ \item
+\url{
+http://git.heroxbd.z.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/?p=doc.git;a=blob;f=glep-gap.rst;hb=HE
+AD}
+\end{itemize}
+
+
+GLEP draft:
+ After a short discussion, the following vote was taken:
+\vote{The council endorses the GLEP draft for RAP and encourages its
+ further refinement (including inside the portage tree if helpful).
+ The council looks forward to the final draft for eventual approval.}{
+ Accepted unanimously.}
+
+Reinitiation of a GLEP team and recovery of the GLEP process.
+ --- Action: rich0 will put out a call for volunteers.
+