summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
blob: b0884ce648f6e0db557a344c7448a92724ebe3eb (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
\summary{2005}{11}{15}

\agendaitem{GLEP 41}
\index{arch testers}\index{GLEPs!process}

The authors of \glep{41} made the changes to the GLEP's wording as
requested by the council during October's meeting.  Thus, it was brought
to vote.  Before I relieve you of the suspense of the vote's outcome,
let me say that a policy decision also came about as a result of last
night's vote.

GLEP 41 was never resubmitted to this mailing list (gentoo-dev) after
the wording changed.  Most of the council members were uncomfortable
with this idea.  That was the first and *only* time the council will
vote that way again.  Following this, every resubmission must be
discussed on -dev for 7 days minimum before being resubmitted to the
council 7 days before that meeting.

As such, GLEP 41 was voted in by majority (only one dissenting vote).
The subdomain for the arch tester email aliases has not been decided (it
is beyond the scope of the council's role in the GLEP).



\agendaitem{Portage signing}
\index{portage signing}

The last agenda item was a summary of the progress of portage signing as
presented by Marius Mauch (genone).  The story is dismal -- no progress
has really been made because nobody has taken ownership of implementing
it yet.  Thus, the Council decided that its members would scratch the
beginnings of the GLEP together and forward that GLEP to the original
participants/proposers in the prior discussion (which was carried out
last year under the old metastructure management).  From there the GLEP
will be presented to -dev for discussion before the Council takes
further action on it.  The Council has agreed to forward their scratch
GLEP to the original proposers/partcipants before December's Council
meeting.