1 |
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> As such, I believe Arch Testers should have themselves an IRC channel, |
4 |
> where Arch testers are OP, and membership of arch testers is voluntary |
5 |
> ( but encouraged ). |
6 |
> |
7 |
|
8 |
The history here is that ATs typically hung out in the arch channels |
9 |
themselves, like #gentoo-amd64. |
10 |
|
11 |
Back in the day when the arches were new, there was a lot of general |
12 |
activity in these channels around adapting packages/etc. For the more |
13 |
minor arches it may still be that way. The ATs were viewed as just |
14 |
another part of that. Non-dev ATs were typically given at least voice |
15 |
in these channels. Back in those days the arch leads were also fairly |
16 |
active positions. Different arches sometimes had different policies |
17 |
on the role of ATs, and for non-dev ATs there was close coordination |
18 |
since a dev would need to make the commits. |
19 |
|
20 |
These days upstream is a lot more attentive to the more popular archs |
21 |
(IMO), so there isn't as much widespread patching/porting/etc going |
22 |
on. I think this is part of what has led to the drop in arch team |
23 |
activity, and AT activity as well (nobody is |
24 |
recruiting/encouraging/etc them). |
25 |
|
26 |
I'm not trying to dismiss your suggestion. I just wanted to point out |
27 |
that ATs do actually have a place of sorts right now other than -dev. |
28 |
They just don't have one place across all arches. Maybe that should |
29 |
change, maybe not. I'd be interested in the thoughts of the ATs |
30 |
themselves. |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
Rich |