diff options
author | Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> | 2005-12-16 03:47:34 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> | 2005-12-16 03:47:34 +0000 |
commit | f58d701a95a7d66c69833a5cb4067ba6283973de (patch) | |
tree | f788b94e0fbd7f9b56c0f84e3639acd0df91bd37 /meeting-logs/20051215-summary.txt | |
parent | decembers log (diff) | |
download | council-f58d701a95a7d66c69833a5cb4067ba6283973de.tar.gz council-f58d701a95a7d66c69833a5cb4067ba6283973de.tar.bz2 council-f58d701a95a7d66c69833a5cb4067ba6283973de.zip |
december summary
Diffstat (limited to 'meeting-logs/20051215-summary.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | meeting-logs/20051215-summary.txt | 23 |
1 files changed, 23 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/meeting-logs/20051215-summary.txt b/meeting-logs/20051215-summary.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..979ab41 --- /dev/null +++ b/meeting-logs/20051215-summary.txt @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +this months meeting wasnt too eventful, kind of quiet ... on the agenda: + +- Marius: decision on multi-hash for Manifest1 +there was a bit of hearsay about why the council was asked to review/decide +on this issue since we werent able to locate any portage devs at the time of +the meeting ... so our decision comes with a slight caveat. assuming the +reasons our input was asked for was summarized in the e-mail originally sent +by Marius [1], then we're for what we dubbed option (2.5.1). that is, the +portage team should go ahead with portage 2.0.54 and include support for +SHA256/RMD160 hashes on top of MD5 hashes. SHA1 should not be included as +having both SHA256/SHA1 is pointless. further more, we hope this is just a +hold over until Manifest2 is ironed out/approved/implemented/deployed. it +was also noted that we should probably omit ChangeLog and metadata.xml files +from the current Manifest schema as digesting them serves no real purpose. +[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/33434 + +- Council: portage signing +shortly after our November meeting, a nice summary was posted by Robin +Johnson that covered signing issues from top to bottom. as such, it was felt +that trying to throw together a GLEP would not be beneficial. instead we +will be adding a constant agenda item to future council meetings as to the +status of portage signing issues to keep the project from slipping into +obscurity again. |