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
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
|
Summary of the Gentoo Council meeting 14 February 2016
Roll call
=================
Present:
blueness, dilfridge, jlec, k_f, rich0, ulm, williamh
1. Options for new XML validation language
=================
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/3ebf4ccf0d4f27d6240888a3100d0d58
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/fa05f5319ef4255d3e3fe34da79a2534
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.
* Which are Gentoo's requirements for an xml validation language?
* Can both options provide the necessary capabilities?
* What are the pros and cons specific for our requirements?
* What are the advantages over our current system? Specifically what cannot
be done currently?
* Which tools are impacted when switching from DTD to an alternative?
Michał Górny volunteered to do some research on the output of all three
validators.
2. Discuss situation of libressl support maintenance
=================
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/dc5406af670aebc050362fcbd8cd528e
The libressl situation sums up as following:
* main maintainer is currently inactive
* no team is present for libressl in Gentoo
* 1/2 of the tree has libressl support implemented
* a quite solid transition plan [1] is in place
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
* Finish the work or remove it again?
* Does it make sense to introduce a second highly security relevant library
to the tree?
* Who adds the necessary code to the packages, the libressl team directly, or
via patch and bugs, or just the maintainers?
* Who is maintaining the libressl support in the packages, the libressl project
or the individual maintainers?
* What happens in case of API divergence between libressl and openssl? Who
maintains the necessary patches?
1)
https://github.com/gentoo/libressl/wiki/Transition-plan
3. Automatic bug assignments
=================
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.
4. The usage of use() in global scope violates PMS
=================
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/69ed522b3b53de90e616267a77441012
The council members unanimously request all global usage of use() violating
PMS (https://projects.gentoo.org/pms/6/pms.html#x1-650007.1) 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)
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174407
5. Bugs with council involvement
=================
569914:
dilfridge is kindly to be asked to provide the missing council meeting logs
and summary for the 20150727 meeting
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.
6. Open floor
=================
--
|
GitWeb