Summary of the council meeting 10/Dec/2017

Agenda announcement: [1]


Roll call
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Present: dilfridge, k_f, mgorny, mrueg (proxy for tamiko), slyfox, 
  ulm, williamh
Absent: -


Lack of enough package maintainers [2]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

While it is clear that there is a lack of package maintainers, the
solution for that problem is not clear. In a corresponding 
brainstorming the following topics were touched (without any decisions
or votes):

* Some sort of recruitment drive could be done, for example starting
  at FOSDEM.
* Presence at conferences and in the social media is important.
* drobbins suggested that Funtoo people could provide support that is
  proxied into Gentoo.
* There's no significant recruiter backlog; recruiting is going quite
  smoothly for competent candidates
* Making visible which packages need help and which of those are 
  critical is important. This touches on the question what "critical"
  precisely means, and in turn on gentoostats-like usage statistics
  collection.
* Should maintainer-needed packages ever become stable?


Update of GLEP 42 [3,4]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The linked changes [4] to GLEP 42 (mainly dropping the requirement of
detached OpenPGP signatures) were approved by unanimous vote.


Final review of GLEP 74 [5,6]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

GLEP 74 was approved by unanimous vote.


Restricting gentoo-dev/-project posting [7]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

A lengthy discussion on moderating of or restricting posting to the
gentoo-dev and gentoo-project mailing lists took place. This also 
touched how topics should be distributed across the lists and whether
an additional mailing list would be useful.

Vote: "Do we want a public mailing list with posting restricted to 
Gentoo developers (+ voiced contributors)?"
- 2 no votes, 3 yes votes, 2 votes "yes if that list is gentoo-dev"

Vote: "Do we want a topic split, i.e., technical versus 
organizational, similar as now between gentoo-dev and gentoo-project
mailing list?"
- 5 yes, 2 abstain

Vote: "Shall official business (eg. council-relevant things) take 
place on non-restricted lists?"
- 2 yes, 4 no, 1 abstain

Vote: "Shall all official business take place on restricted lists?"
- 4 no, 3 yes

Vote: "We restrict -dev and keep -project open; council discussions go 
to -project for now."
- 6 yes, 1 no

After announcement and a grace period of 1-2 weeks, posting to the
gentoo-dev mailing list will be restricted to
* @gentoo.org e-mail holders (i.e., Gentoo developers)
* and whitelisted further contributors.

Maintaining the whitelist will be done in a similar fashion as the
Bugzilla bugedit group is handled now, with one vouching developer
required.


Open bugs with council participation
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bug 637274 ("Missing summaries for 20170514 and 20170611 council 
  meetings", [8]):
  This is work in progress.

Bug 637328 ("GLEP 14 needs to be updated", [9]):
  k_f will follow this up with the security team.
  
Bug 635344 ("[TRACKER] manifest-hashes replacement", [10]):
  This is well underway and can be closed or reassigned.
  
  
Open floor
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  
* The council agrees that kicking and moderation should be restricted 
  to the meeting chair for the duration of a council meeting.
  
  
[ 1] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/530b8878cba3973f40b7ea52720056fc
[ 2] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/4771bc564060b7ab1f64d5c094105493
[ 3] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/6f070b64892d2e351bd51b2ffa1dc64e
[ 4] https://gitweb.gentoo.org/data/glep.git/log/?h=glep42-update
[ 5] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/7d189934e371842fc799ba1eead3d01f
[ 6] https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0074.html
[ 7] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/6e7cc13cd850be7dbd86376d3a197a16
[ 8] https://bugs.gentoo.org/637274
[ 9] https://bugs.gentoo.org/637328
[10] https://bugs.gentoo.org/635344