Roy Bamford wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 2008.06.05 01:00, ?ukasz Damentko wrote: >> Hi guys, >> >> Nominations for the Gentoo Council 2008/2009 are open now and will be >> open for the next two weeks (until 23:59 UTC, 18/06/2008). > > Team, > > I don't want to nominate anyone who hasn't been nominated already. > I would like to address all the candidates who have or will accept > council nominations. > > 1. Please tell us how/if you plan to fix GLEP 39. (You may not consider > it broken)
a) A GLEP 39 is a "proposal" to do/implement something and should not be used as a way to finally document something. So, if we want to fix it, we should write down a new GLEP replacing GLEP 39 and then write that information down where it belongs to: in proj/en/council (and/or the developer handbook) b) Reading GLEP 1 you'll see that there are only two types of GLEPs: "Standards Track" and "Informational". One is for technical stuff and the other for organizational, but: "Informational GLEPs do not necessarily represent a Gentoo Linux community consensus or recommendation, so users and implementors are free to ignore Informational GLEPs or follow their advice." So we either have to stop using GLEPs for such kind of "rules/definitions" OR redefine how GLEPs should be used properly for changing organizational processes. We should finally stop doing cosmetic changes or we will forever struggle with outside people who know our rules better than we and as a result waste our time and energy and block our processes. Cheers, Tiziano -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
