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
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
|
\summary{2016}{12}{11}
\agendaitem{Dropping of IA-64/SPARC Stable support}
\index{arch!ia64}\index{arch!sparc}\index{stabilization!stable arches}
\index{security!supported arches}
The general discussion was around the distinction between security
support and stable support, and the general sense was that stable
support should probably be tabled and addressed by the stable working
group. It was believed that addressing security support for these archs
would address the original concern.
\vote{The council defers to the security team, but is supportive of dropping
security support for sparc if it is unable to generally meet the
security team timelines.}{Accepted unanimously.}
\agendaitem{Gentoo-council mailing list, -project list moderation (also, purpose
of -project)}
\index{mailing list!gentoo-project}
\vote{
The council would like the community to consider mailing list
discipline when posting to the various MLs of the Gentoo community. This
includes, but is not limited to, thread discipline and a consideration
of whether a new post adds value to the discussion at hand when posting
in order to ensure a good signal to noise ratio. Messages should be inline
quotation and cropped to the relevant quotation needed for context in order to
improve readability}{yes: blueness, dilfridge, jlec, k_f, rich0, ulm; abstain:
williamh}
It was noted that sometimes top-posting can be appropriate, and these
aren't completely hard rules.
\agendaitem{Open floor}
\index{trustees}\index{metastructure!reorganization}
\index{umbrella organization}\index{SPI}
prometheanfire brought up whether it would be beneficial to have
Council/Trustee members attend each other's meetings to provide more
immediate feedback on questions. The sense was that this could be
useful, but probably should be based on specific agenda topics/etc and
requested in advance vs being a general practice.
prometheanfire brought up his proposal for having a single governing
board at
\href{
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10xzPUREMzZllT7dLs85JjMvlymEY9wWzYPRCnTZIsfI/
edit?usp=sharing}{the linked Google docs document}.
He is looking for comments from both Council and Trustees. It was
suggested that this be taken to the lists, but there was general
interest in participation.
rich0 mentioned that he would be working on a comrel glep, but he'll
take the details to the lists/etc as time was running long. Anybody who
is interested can participate, and prometheanfire and neddyseagoon both
registered interest.
dilgridge brought up Software in the Public Interest and asked the
Trustees to take another look at them. It was suggested that this might
be worked into the single board proposal in some way since it is a
metastructure change.
|
GitWeb
