-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 09:38:17 +0000 Ferris McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 11:12:27 +0200 > "Piotr Jaroszyński" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I > > have a few technical questions for you: > > > > 1. GLEP54 > > 2. GLEP55 > > 3. Most wanted changes in future EAPIs > > > > [1] - http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0054.html > > [2] - http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0055.html > > > > -- > > Best Regards, > > Piotr Jaroszyński > > [Error decoding BASE64] > > Sorry to disappoint you. If you get me on council, I'm going to ask for > a recommendation and follow it unless it looks ridiculous. For the > GLEPs you mentioned, unless someone came forward otherwise, I'd approve > them out of hand. As for future EAPIs, that is not a council matter > that I can see. Why on earth can't that be done at the level of those > who care? I.e., people who implement package managers or want EAPIs. > It seems to me all we want is consistency, and council's job is to put > package manager people into a room and tell them not to come out until > they agree on something. If I'm a councilor, I really don't care what > that is. > > I'll listen to what you want for future EAPIs, but I don't think it's > council's job to decide. > Sorry, I missed something. This is probably a QA matter since they own PMS, I believe. But it still is not a Council matter. It's QA's job to get an agreement on EAPIs if there is a problem. > Regards, Ferris - -- Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Gentoo Linux (Sparc, Devrel, Userrel, Trustees) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkhLslUACgkQQa6M3+I///fHlQCgjjzd35UA3ZzsV2VfVSz2BAo9 yhAAn3JHu/Y1hEcVqo4AVx+1Gwbv3zRI =XM2p -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
