amne        here
betelgeuse  absent (1 hour late)
dberkholz   here
flameeyes   here
lu_zero     here
vapier      absent (no show)
uberlord    resigned
jokey       here (replacing uberlord)

Agenda:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/52772

Also continuing discussion on CoC enforcement. Proposal:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.council/82

==============================================================================

Empty council slot: vote for Jokey to happen on gentoo-council list
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Jokey is the candidate to replace uberlord [1], and it requires a 
unanimous council vote [2]. Since not all council members are present, 
we'll do this vote on the gentoo-council list. All 6 present council 
members supported Jokey's addition.

1. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20070208-summary.txt
2. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/voting-logs/council-2007-vote-distribution.txt


Daylight savings change: no slacker marks
-----------------------------------------

In the US and Europe, 2000 UTC shifted by an hour in local time. The 
email announcement was wrong, so we will not give slacker marks to the 
two absent council members.

vapier needs to fix his script before the next announcement.


EAPI=1 approved for use in the main tree
----------------------------------------

Stable portage version 2.1.3.12 supports EAPI=1. It's now officially OK 
to start using it in the main tree. From the ebuild ChangeLog for 
portage:

  This release is the first to have support for EAPI-1 (#194876), which 
  includes SLOT dependencies (#174405), IUSE defaults (#174410), and 
  ECONF_SOURCE support for the default src_compile function (#179380). 
  Package maintainers should carefully consider the backward compatibility 
  consequences before defining EAPI="1" in any ebuilds, especially if
  other packages depend on those ebuilds. See the ebuild(5) and emerge(1) 
  manual pages for EAPI related documentation.

EAPI=1 features are documented in PMS as well as the man pages, but they 
are not yet documented in the devmanual or the dev handbook.

Code of Conduct enforcement proposal: generally positive feedback
-----------------------------------------------------------------

dberkholz sent out a proposal this morning [1], so we just discussed it 
today instead of voting. Initial feedback from council members was 
positive. Some concerns came up on the list about time zone differences 
and coverage, which were brought up again during the meeting.

People generally agreed that although the environment is better now, it 
hasn't been before and won't always be good.

lu_zero brought up the point that since things are fairly good now, we 
don't need to rush through this process and we can take our time and do 
things right.

Council support for the team's actions should not be as controversial 
with the requirement that all actions be private.

The team will need to create the tools to deal with the actions it needs 
to take (short-term moderation on IRC, mailing lists, and Bugzilla). 
This could happen during the initial training period suggested on the 
gentoo-council list.

If there's already existing moderation somewhere (for example many of 
the #gentoo-* IRC channels or the forums), the team will first liaise 
with them rather than preempt them. All official Gentoo forums must 
adhere to the CoC, however; having their own moderation does not exclude 
them from following Gentoo's standards as a whole.

The expectation is that successive actions against the same person will 
increase in length, eventually reaching the 3-day cutoff that requires 
council approval and forwarding to devrel/userrel. The idea is that if 
someone keeps violating the CoC after a given length of moderation, it 
apparently wasn't enough so it shouldn't be repeated.

Next month, we will vote on a concrete proposal.

1. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.council/82


Baselayout-2: uberlord will continue to maintain it
---------------------------------------------------

lu_zero asked whether we had anything to do about baselayout-2 since 
uberlord resigned. He's continuing to maintain it in a git repository 
and will remain upstream for it. More details will emerge over time.

kingtaco raised the question of trusting external releases and hosts. 
Some responses suggested that using git may prevent the malicious host, 
because of the possibility of GPG-signed tags. He mentioned the 
possibility of the infra team hosting Gentoo-critical repositories with 
access by non-Gentoo developers. It's just an idea at this point, but 
he's going to talk to the rest of the infra team.