Roll call --------- amne here betelgeuse here dberkholz here flameeyes here lu_zero here vapier here jokey here Agenda ------ New USE documentation http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_149120.xml Considering the precedent set by how this was implemented, what should we do? - Should we leave it or revert it? - Should we require a GLEP? - Other options - Discuss improvements on -dev, make changes, document them. In other words, normal development process - Leave as is - Require future global changes to be sent to -dev in advance, or they will be reverted. Code of Conduct enforcement http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.council/82 http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20071108-summary.txt - Should we make a decision today? - If so, what decision? - If not, what needs to happen for us to make a decision? ======================================================================= New USE documentation --------------------- 1. We're leaving it, and considering further changes 2. It should have been posted to -dev before committing for discussion General process for global changes: 1. Post to -dev for discussion 2a. Consensus for implementing your idea as-is. No GLEP, no council. BREAK. 2b. Consensus for a GLEP for your idea, maybe disagreement over the idea. Write GLEP. Discuss on -dev. Submit GLEP to council. 2c. Disagreement, but some support. No consensus for a GLEP. Respond to the council agenda mail with a post containing a summary of your idea as well as patches for code and documentation. 2d. No support. Refine your idea, or think of a new one. GOTO 1. 3. Council votes on the idea. Any future global changes that aren't discussed on -dev in advance may be reverted by the council if at least two council members vote to revert the changes. Those changes must be discussed on -dev and approved by the council before recommitting. If they're recommitted without council approval, the developer in question gets kicked out. Code of Conduct enforcement --------------------------- Christy Fullam (musikc) made some valuable suggestions: - The proposal should be restricted to only apply to #gentoo-dev and the gentoo-dev list. Most other locations already have moderators of some sort, and the council can work with them directly if there are CoC problems. This idea went over really well. - Moderation should be capped at 2 days, and then will be handed off to devrel/userrel. No council approval involved. Mike Doty (kingtaco) suggested that we look for a way to prevent the snowball effect on IRC: what if a modded person is voiced/opped by an unmodded person, and a chain of this goes? Donnie Berkholz (dberkholz) will incorporate these changes into the proposal and post an update to the -council list. Open floor ---------- Wulf Krueger (philantrop) asked which PMS repo was authoritative. The external one had been getting changes, and the "official" gentoo.org one had not. Mike Doty reported that they're working on allowing non-Gentoo developers to contribute to the repository, which should resolve the technical problems. Wulf responded that some people didn't want to commit to a Gentoo-hosted repository.