-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 23:42:02 +0200 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | Not that bugging people w/ pointless paperwork would contribute > | anything useful to this new project or get any work done... What > | exactly is there to GLEP at this point? > > A GLEP is not pointless paperwork if done correctly. It can be an > extremely useful way of working out and setting down exactly what the > goals are, and determining how best to achieve them. It's also a good > way of getting input from concerned parties rather than pissing them > off royally by sticking out an announcement about something that could > be seen as stepping on their toes. > In this case, it's not GLEP-worthy. Perhaps the original mail could have been more clear, so that releng would not have felt that someone was dumping more work on them; when, in fact, Seeds can exist independently.
With the exception of some members of releng (whom I would ask to reconsider their initial worries, now that further discussion and clarification has ensued), no one else is noticeably concerned. If Seeds decides they want to *make* some things happen to all/some of the projects, maybe at that point a GLEP will be needed to address that issue. But re-using and re-issueing existing resources doesn't warrant a GLEP. Well, maybe infra might disagree if the tarball load gets hosted on their hardware. But for now, it's not even a Gentoo-hosted project; seems to just be on overlays. Quit whining. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFEbvVrsJQqN81j74RAjMHAJ9ejn8PUDXTsnFAu3MiFmc53exSYwCfQLi8 RObT4gxx7K6uIlCZtI/gVK4= =RFI+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
