summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'decisions/summary-20131008.tex')
-rw-r--r--decisions/summary-20131008.tex60
1 files changed, 60 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/decisions/summary-20131008.tex b/decisions/summary-20131008.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f1264d4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/decisions/summary-20131008.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+
+\summary{2013}{10}{8}
+
+
+\agendaitem{Code of Conduct discussion}
+\index{Code of Conduct}
+
+References:
+\begin{itemize}
+ \item
+ http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/3061 (dead link)
+ \item
+ http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2470 (dead link)
+ \item
+ http://dev.gentooexperimental.org/~scarabeus/gentoo-coc.txt (dead link)
+ \item
+ http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20130611.txt
+\end{itemize}
+
+
+\vote{
+ Should the current code of conduct undergo "minor" or "major"
+ revision, with minor revision being just updating the wording in
+ the old text to current organizational structures?}{
+4 votes for minor, 3 for major revision}
+
+In the subsequent discussion it was suggested to incorporate changes
+from Scarabeus' text proposal into the existing Code of Conduct.
+To ease discussion on this during next month's meeting, a comparison
+of the files should be circulated among the council members during
+the upcoming weeks.
+
+Dilfridge volunteers to go through the old Code of Conduct text and
+fix the worst outdated passages.
+
+
+\agendaitem{Open bugs with council involvement}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+ \item
+ \bug{477030}:
+ No progress since last meeting.
+ \item
+ \bug{481202}:
+ Consensus is that all is done here and that both the last bug
+ blocking it and the tracker itself can be resolved.
+\end{itemize}
+
+
+\agendaitem{Open floor}
+\index{INSTALL_MASK}
+
+WilliamH brings up the issue of using INSTALL_MASK for avoiding
+installation of small utility files. His question is how we could
+avoid requiring a re-build of the entire installed package set when
+the value of INSTALL_MASK is changed. As a possible solution, a
+feature for the package manager is proposed: it could record whether
+a package is affected by INSTALL_MASK during installation, and offer
+a switch to only rebuild all these packages. Implementation should
+not have high priority though.