On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:38 PM, hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Rich Freeman: >> On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 12:38 PM, hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> >>> The council has (at least implicitly) stated that people may stop using >>> common eclasses that standardize stuff in gentoo if they don't like them >>> (that includes python, ruby, perl... eclasses as well, FYI). >> >> Maybe we should both step back a bit. The Council has said this, no >> more or less: >> >> - Motion: "Every developer is allowed to commit and maintain games >> ebuilds, without the need to ask for permission or review from the >> games team. The games team does not have authority to override >> maintainer decisions on packages they don't maintain." >> Accepted unanimously. >> Note: This should be understood as clarification of existing policy. >> > > So can I commit to any category such as ruby, perl, haskell, sound, > gnome without any sort of review too, no matter if I follow any sort of > project standards (except following PMS)?
If you maintain a package that uses ruby/perl/haskell/gnome, or even, heaven forbid, sound, you can maintain it as you wish as long as you generally follow general policy. Of course, if your package doesn't work it is subject to QA, and if you don't follow the guidelines issued by those groups it is more likely to end up not working at some point. Why you'd want to re-invent the wheel vs just using their eclasses is beyond me. That doesn't mean that you can just mess with packages that make up ruby/perl/gnome/haskell, etc (not really sure how sound fits into that). They are maintained by various project teams that operate as a team. The issue here was projects in general claiming monopolies on entire genres of software. You don't need the blessing of the games team to maintain a game. Heck, you'd be hard-pressed to even define what is and isn't a game anyway. We also found that many games were already not using the eclass (such as anything bundled with kde/gnome/etc). Tim's response covered the rest of your email fairly well, so I won't repeat it. QA did note that they're going to be taking a closer look at games in today's Council meeting. -- Rich
