Continue the index experiment

6 files changed, 214 insertions, 114 deletions

diff --git a/decisions/.gitignore b/decisions/.gitignore
index 8c7f375..207954b 100644
--- a/decisions/.gitignore
+++ b/decisions/.gitignore
@@ -6,3 +6,4 @@ decisions.log
 decisions.out
 decisions.pdf
 decisions.toc
+summary-*.aux
diff --git a/decisions/Makefile b/decisions/Makefile
index b5fd2d6..0ae1bd6 100644
--- a/decisions/Makefile
+++ b/decisions/Makefile
@@ -3,10 +3,10 @@ default: decisions.pdf
 .SUFFIXES:
 
 %.aux: %.tex
-	pdflatex $(*F).tex
+	pdflatex decisions.tex
 
-%.idx: %.aux %.tex
-	makeindex $(*F)
+decisions.ind: *.aux *.tex
+	makeindex decisions
 
-%.pdf: %.aux %.idx %.tex
-	pdflatex $(*F).tex
+decisions.pdf: *.aux *.idx *.tex *.ind
+	pdflatex decisions
diff --git a/decisions/decisions.tex b/decisions/decisions.tex
index ed8af76..b96df12 100644
--- a/decisions/decisions.tex
+++ b/decisions/decisions.tex
@@ -9,18 +9,17 @@
 
 \newcommand{\todo}[1]{\textcolor{red}{\bf todo: {#1}}}
 
-\newcommand{\agoref}[2]{\href{https://archives.gentoo.org/#1/message/#2}{Mailing list {#1}, message {#2}}}
+\newcommand{\agoref}[2]{\href{https://archives.gentoo.org/#1/message/#2}{mailing list {#1}, message {#2}}}
+\newcommand{\wgoref}[1]{\href{https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/#1}{wiki page {#1}}}
 
-\newcommand{\bug}[1]{\href{https://bugs.gentoo.org/#1}{Bug {#1}}\index{Bugs!#1}}
+\newcommand{\bug}[1]{\href{https://bugs.gentoo.org/#1}{bug {#1}}\index{Bugs!#1}}
+\newcommand{\glep}[1]{\href{https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GLEP:#1}{GLEP {#1}}\index{GLEP!#1}}
 
 \setlength{\parindent}{0cm}
 
-
-
-
-
 \makeindex
 
+
 \begin{document}
 
 \title{Council decision and summary overview}
@@ -29,7 +28,6 @@
 
 \maketitle
 
-
 \printindex
 
 
@@ -41,108 +39,9 @@
 
 \chapter{Official summaries}
 
-\section{14 February 2016}
-
-\subsection{Options for new XML validation language}\index{XML validation}
-
-References:
-\begin{itemize}
-\item \agoref{gentoo-project}{3ebf4ccf0d4f27d6240888a3100d0d58}
-\item \agoref{gentoo-project}{fa05f5319ef4255d3e3fe34da79a2534}
-\end{itemize}
-
-The situation of what would be the best option to choose wasn't completely
-clear to the council and the proposing party wasn't present.
-
-Any further decision have been postponed until better metrics are available.
-
-\begin{itemize}
-\item Which are Gentoo's requirements for an xml validation language?
-\item Can both options provide the necessary capabilities?
-\item What are the pros and cons specific for our requirements?
-\item What are the advantages over our current system? Specifically what cannot
-  be done currently?
-\item Which tools are impacted when switching from DTD to an alternative?
-\end{itemize}
-
-Michał Górny volunteered to do some research on the output of all three
-validators.
-
-\subsection{Discuss situation of libressl support maintenance}\index{LibreSSL}
-
-https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/dc5406af670aebc050362fcbd8cd528e
-
-The libressl situation sums up as following:
-
-\begin{itemize}
-\item main maintainer is currently inactive
-\item no team is present for libressl in Gentoo
-\item 1/2 of the tree has libressl support implemented
-\item a quite solid transition plan [1] is in place
-\end{itemize}
-
-The council shortly touched various topics around the introduction of
-libressl into the Gentoo ecosystem, but concluded that a project team
-is needed, to which questions and concerns can be directed.
-
-Some question which arise and should be answered by the project comprise
-\begin{itemize}
-\item Finish the work or remove it again?
-\item Does it make sense to introduce a second highly security relevant library 
-  to the tree?
-\item Who adds the necessary code to the packages, the libressl team directly, or
-  via patch and bugs, or just the maintainers?
-\item Who is maintaining the libressl support in the packages, the libressl project
-  or the individual maintainers?
-\item What happens in case of API divergence between libressl and openssl? Who
-  maintains the necessary patches?
-\end{itemize}
-
-1)
-https://github.com/gentoo/libressl/wiki/Transition-plan
-
-
-\subsection{Automatic bug assignments}\index{Bug assignment}\index{Bug wrangling}
- 
-https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/00e02ff494857599633e2bbc30520ca3
-
-The general preference of the council is positive towards automatic bug
-assignments. But so far no working solution has been proposed. At this
-point the Council sees no reason for any decision to be made itself.
-The community or the bug wrangling project should draft an implementation.
-
-
-\subsection{The usage of use() in global scope violates PMS}\index{use()}\index{PMS}\index{Dynamic SLOT}
-
-https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/69ed522b3b53de90e616267a77441012
-
-The council members unanimously request all global usage of use() violating 
-PMS (\verb+https://projects.gentoo.org/pms/6/pms.html#x1-650007.1\verb+) to be fixed 
-until the March 2016 council meeting. After that members of the QA are 
-asked to fix remaining ebuilds/eclasses.
-
-This decision renders the proposed solution for dynamic SLOTs [2] impossible.
-This topic was deferred to a later meeting to give time for an alternative solution to be found.
-
-2)
-\verb+https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174407\verb+
-
-\subsection{Bugs with council involvement}
-
-\bug{569914}:
-dilfridge is kindly to be asked to provide the missing council meeting logs
-and summary for the 20150727 meeting
-
-\bug{568068}:
-ulm volunteered to prepare an updated GLEP 42 for the next meeting.\index{GLEP 42}
-The only open question is if the new news item format should include a
-Display-If-Visible header.
-
-\subsection{Open floor}
-
---
-
-
+\include{summary-20160214}
+\include{summary-20160313}
+\include{summary-20160410}
 
 
 
diff --git a/decisions/summary-20160214.tex b/decisions/summary-20160214.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f239cb1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/decisions/summary-20160214.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
+\section{14 February 2016}
+
+\subsection{Options for new XML validation language}\index{XML validation}
+
+References:
+\begin{itemize}
+\item \agoref{gentoo-project}{3ebf4ccf0d4f27d6240888a3100d0d58}
+\item \agoref{gentoo-project}{fa05f5319ef4255d3e3fe34da79a2534}
+\end{itemize}
+
+The situation of what would be the best option to choose wasn't completely
+clear to the council and the proposing party wasn't present.
+
+Any further decision have been postponed until better metrics are available.
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item Which are Gentoo's requirements for an xml validation language?
+\item Can both options provide the necessary capabilities?
+\item What are the pros and cons specific for our requirements?
+\item What are the advantages over our current system? Specifically what cannot
+  be done currently?
+\item Which tools are impacted when switching from DTD to an alternative?
+\end{itemize}
+
+Michał Górny volunteered to do some research on the output of all three
+validators.
+
+\subsection{Discuss situation of libressl support maintenance}\index{LibreSSL}
+
+Reference: \agoref{gentoo-project}{dc5406af670aebc050362fcbd8cd528e}
+
+The libressl situation sums up as following:
+\begin{itemize}
+\item main maintainer is currently inactive
+\item no team is present for libressl in Gentoo
+\item 1/2 of the tree has libressl support implemented
+\item a quite solid \href{https://github.com/gentoo/libressl/wiki/Transition-plan}{transition 
+plan} is in place
+\end{itemize}
+
+The council shortly touched various topics around the introduction of
+libressl into the Gentoo ecosystem, but concluded that a project team
+is needed, to which questions and concerns can be directed.
+
+Some question which arise and should be answered by the project comprise
+\begin{itemize}
+\item Finish the work or remove it again?
+\item Does it make sense to introduce a second highly security relevant library 
+  to the tree?
+\item Who adds the necessary code to the packages, the libressl team directly, or
+  via patch and bugs, or just the maintainers?
+\item Who is maintaining the libressl support in the packages, the libressl project
+  or the individual maintainers?
+\item What happens in case of API divergence between libressl and openssl? Who
+  maintains the necessary patches?
+\end{itemize}
+
+\subsection{Automatic bug assignments}\index{Bug assignment}\index{Bug wrangling}
+
+Reference: \agoref{gentoo-project}{00e02ff494857599633e2bbc30520ca3}
+
+The general preference of the council is positive towards automatic bug
+assignments. But so far no working solution has been proposed. At this
+point the Council sees no reason for any decision to be made itself.
+The community or the bug wrangling project should draft an implementation.
+
+
+\subsection{The usage of use() in global scope violates PMS}\index{use()}\index{PMS}\index{Dynamic SLOT}
+
+Reference: \agoref{gentoo-project}{69ed522b3b53de90e616267a77441012}
+
+The council members unanimously request all global usage of use() violating 
+PMS (\verb+https://projects.gentoo.org/pms/6/pms.html#x1-650007.1\verb+) to be fixed 
+until the March 2016 council meeting. After that members of the QA are 
+asked to fix remaining ebuilds/eclasses.
+
+This decision renders the proposed solution for dynamic SLOTs (\bug{174407}) impossible.
+This topic was deferred to a later meeting to give time for an alternative solution to be found.
+
+\subsection{Bugs with council involvement}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item \bug{569914}:
+dilfridge is kindly to be asked to provide the missing council meeting logs
+and summary for the 20150727 meeting
+\item \bug{568068}:
+ulm volunteered to prepare an updated \glep{42} for the next meeting.
+The only open question is if the new news item format should include a
+Display-If-Visible header.
+\end{itemize}
+
+\subsection{Open floor}
+
+--
+
+
+
diff --git a/decisions/summary-20160313.tex b/decisions/summary-20160313.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..83c35aa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/decisions/summary-20160313.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+
+\section{13 March 2016}
+
+\subsection{GLEP 42 update}
+
+The Council considered ulm’s proposed extension of the News Item Format as
+specified in \glep{42} to allow EAPI=5 style package dependency specifications, 
+see \agoref{gentoo-dev}{b9460b9c8d578c3498c217c17b75afd4}-
+
+The Council unanimously approved the changes.  This introduces “News item format
+2.0”.
+
+\subsection{Historical behaviour vs PMS}\index{PMS}
+
+The Council considered the question of how to deal with historical behavior of
+packages/eclasses and package managers that are not in compliance with PMS and
+adopted the following policy by vote of 5 yes votes and 1 abstention.
+
+"All non-PMS-conformant behaviour should be considered a bug, and package /
+eclass / package manager / PMS maintainers should work together and strive to
+achieve consistent behaviour.  We encourage the creation of trackers to identify
+and collect non-PMS-conformant behaviour and to propose fixes.  The council
+recognizes that historically there has been a lack of cooperation; there is
+however no current reason why that should continue.  If in any specific issue no
+progress at all is reached within 6 months, proposing the best technical
+solution is delegated to QA."
+
+\subsection{Bugs with council involvement}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item \bug{575534}: 
+The Council considered bug 575534, "Editing on XS screens".  It was not clear
+why the council was cc-ed and no action was taken.
+\item \bug{574952} and \bug{574080}: \index{Games team}\index{games.eclass}
+The Council also considered bugs 574952, "Games team intentionally ignoring
+messages and bugs in order to stall QA and Council" and 574080, "games.eclass:
+Path customization needs to be removed wrt 20151213 Council meeting".  The
+Council reiterated its position but did not see how we can force the Games Team
+to take action.  It was suggested that QA act to correct the paths in the
+games.eclass.
+\end{itemize}
+
+\subsection{Open floor}
+
+As a follow up on the discussion of the previous meeting about hasufell, blueness
+announced a new project, the LibreSSL project with members blueness, dilfridge,
+soap and zx2c4.\index{LibreSSL}
diff --git a/decisions/summary-20160410.tex b/decisions/summary-20160410.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b415e13
--- /dev/null
+++ b/decisions/summary-20160410.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+\section{10 April 2016}
+
+\subsection{Approval of GLEP 68}
+\index{Language codes}
+
+Reference: \agoref{gentoo-project}{a292e9567fac838681899b50dff24cce}
+
+The format of the "lang" attribute was briefly discussed. Consensus
+was to stick with two-letter language codes from ISO 639-1 for now.
+This can be reconsidered when a real need for extension should arise.
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item Vote: Approval of \glep{68}. Accepted unanimously.
+\end{itemize}
+
+\subsection{ChangeLog files in rsync tree}
+\index{ChangeLog files}\index{rsync tree}\index{ChangeLog sort order}
+
+Reference: \agoref{gentoo-project}{402eb403e0f451e7bc0525b76e9d3da2}
+
+The council discussed the benefit of providing ChangeLog files to
+users, the effort needed to generate them on the infra side, and their
+causing an increase of the gentoo tree's size. The recent repository
+usage survey of robbat2 was considered, especially with respect to the
+order of ChangeLog entries.
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item Vote: "The council does not require that ChangeLogs be generated or
+  distributed through the rsync system. It is at the discretion of our
+  infrastructure team whether or not this service continues."
+  Accepted (4 yes, 1 no, 2 abstention)
+\item Vote: "If ChangeLog files are provided, they must be in the order of
+  newest entries first" Accepted (4 yes, 2 no, 1 abstention)
+\end{itemize}
+
+\subsection{Bugs with council involvement}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item \bug{569914} "Missing summary for 20150727 council meeting",
+  \bug{571490} "Missing summary for 20151025 council meeting":
+  Logs have been uploaded, summaries are in progress.
+\item \bug{566498} "games.eclass: use of games group needs to be removed wrt
+             20151011 Council meeting",
+  \bug{574080} "games.eclass: Path customization needs to be removed wrt
+             20151213 Council meeting",
+  \bug{574952} "Games team intentionally ignoring messages and bugs in
+             order to stall QA and Council":
+  Currently no action from council required. Leave council in CC.
+\item \bug{579460} "please make repoman ignore a missing \verb+# $Id$\verb+ header line":
+  No need to reiterate the decision from the 20141014 council meeting
+  that CVS headers can be dropped.
+\end{itemize}
+  
+\subsection{Open floor}
+
+No issues were brought forward.