1 |
If you're an arch tester reading this, I love you. |
2 |
|
3 |
Your job is mostly thankless and how important it is seems relatively |
4 |
un-reflected in our regular conversations, and this needs to be |
5 |
rectified. |
6 |
|
7 |
Often, I see a stable request get done, and I know what got stabilized |
8 |
was a monumental amount of work, and I just want to thank you for your |
9 |
effort, but there isn't a good place for this. |
10 |
|
11 |
Other times, I may want to ask questions in an informal setting, and |
12 |
get an authoritative answer on what exactly you want of us as an arch |
13 |
tester. |
14 |
|
15 |
Presently, if I want to ask questions about arch testing, the only |
16 |
place to do this is #gentoo-dev, or seek the mailing list like I am now. |
17 |
|
18 |
The latter of these is a bit time consuming, and that probably |
19 |
discourages participation. |
20 |
|
21 |
And the former is not entirely useful as that's likely to get |
22 |
side-tracked by all the people who don't do arch testing opining on |
23 |
what to do, mostly directed by their experience with working with arch |
24 |
testers. |
25 |
|
26 |
This is not "bad" as such, but its not really an authority on arch |
27 |
testing. |
28 |
|
29 |
I believe that as arch testers, you have a right to run a channel as |
30 |
you see fit, and have an authority on how it is you do what you do. |
31 |
|
32 |
As such, I believe Arch Testers should have themselves an IRC channel, |
33 |
where Arch testers are OP, and membership of arch testers is voluntary |
34 |
( but encouraged ). |
35 |
|
36 |
I myself would start such a channel, but I feel it is not my place to |
37 |
found such a channel, as I'm not an arch tester, it would be wrong of |
38 |
me to hold OP of such a channel: That's a right only an Arch tester |
39 |
should have. |
40 |
|
41 |
And a channel opped by and filled with Non-Arch testers on the subject |
42 |
of arch-testing sounds too much like certain political problems we have |
43 |
lately. |
44 |
|
45 |
I also believe somewhat in the idea that /people who are most concerned |
46 |
about an issue/ should also be the same people who /do the work to |
47 |
resolve that issue/, and in that light, it is somewhat disingenuous |
48 |
to constantly fret over the state of arch testing while doing little to |
49 |
actually fix the problem myself. |
50 |
|
51 |
I do have it on my TODO list to attempt rectifying this, and in a |
52 |
semi-long-term view of things I might find myself doing arch testing, |
53 |
but I don't think we should wait until then to have an arch-testing |
54 |
channel ;) |
55 |
|
56 |
It would also probably be useful to have such a channel for arch |
57 |
testers and interested potential-arch-testers to congregate and discuss |
58 |
things, so that the potentials can get a feel for the work in an |
59 |
informal capacity before stepping up to take the load, and the channel |
60 |
would thus also facilitate the transfer of knowledge to widen the |
61 |
tester base. |
62 |
|
63 |
( I understand people may be discussing the potential formation of an |
64 |
AT mailing list/alias/project or something along those lines, but |
65 |
I find such a strategy far too formal to be valuable, and much prefer |
66 |
the flexibility of self-organising groups and the relaxed informality of |
67 |
IRC, which typically don't need any approval to to create or infra |
68 |
assistance to start ) |
69 |
|
70 |
In closing, this is a petition to somebody who is a recognised arch |
71 |
tester to form a channel for this purpose, and encourage other testers |
72 |
to join, and people like myself can then hop on and maybe be more |
73 |
productive as a result. |
74 |
|
75 |
<3 |