Bug 729062 – Services and Software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in the Gentoo namespace

• Status: CONFIRMED
• Product: Gentoo Council

[Description Jonas Stein 2020-06-21 21:11:23 UTC]

Dear Council,

I think services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed in the Gentoo namespace and run in the Gentoo namespace, if possible.

Software for critical services, must not be in the repository of one or some developers, but on the Gentoo infrastructure to ensure an unhindered development of Gentoo in the long term.

Please discuss how we want to add this to our pillars and how we can implement it?
Perhaps add to the Social Contract?

Reproducible: Always

[Comment 1 Sergei Trofimovich (RETIRED) 2020-06-21 21:24:41 UTC]

Can you the request out to gentoo-project@ as well?

I feel the question will benefit from broader discussion.

[Comment 2 Michał Górny 2020-06-21 21:26:52 UTC]

Why is that?  Don't we require Gentoo software to be open source?  This makes it trivial for anyone else to take it over, wherever it is developed right now, and fork/move into Gentoo 'namespace' if necessary.

[Comment 3 Thomas Deutschmann (RETIRED) 2020-09-13 18:37:45 UTC]

Finally posted to dev mailing list, sorry for the huge delay ;]

[Comment 4 Sergei Trofimovich (RETIRED) 2021-01-10 20:20:58 UTC]

Update from 2021-01-10 council@ meeting:

Whissi@ will follow up with jstein@ possibly upcoming week.

[Comment 5 Thomas Deutschmann (RETIRED) 2021-05-09 16:59:38 UTC]

Temporary unassign from council — not yet ready.

[Comment 6 Ulrich Müller 2023-02-12 19:07:51 UTC]

Reassigned per 2023-02-12 council meeting.

[Comment 7 Alec Warner (RETIRED) 2023-02-12 19:13:53 UTC]

(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #6)
> Reassigned per 2023-02-12 council meeting.

To avoid sending someone to read the meeting logs:

The council has decided that they do not want to "Discuss how we want to add this to our pillars and how we can implement it?" and that should be a job for the community (and for the person proposing the change.)

Hence they re-assigned this bug to the original proposer with the idea that once the community generates a more concrete proposal, they will then decide to include it in some way (or not.)

-A