1 |
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 11:39:16PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: |
2 |
> To my fellow Gentoo developers, |
3 |
> |
4 |
> in the Sunrise project we have some users who are ambitious and cotribute |
5 |
> more than a few ebuilds. Those regulars have the possibility to take the |
6 |
> ebuild quiz and acquire the title "Sunrise trusted committer". Those |
7 |
> sunrise committers can use extended bugzilla permissions to edit keywords |
8 |
> EBUILD and REQUEST for example in the maintainer-wanted@ and |
9 |
> maintainer-needed@ bugzilla region where usually developers clean up litle |
10 |
> or have no interest in spending time on. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Now I tried to get this done with the "[GLEP] Bugzilla access for |
13 |
> contributors" and I was told it is to undefined and misses out the point of |
14 |
> removing access levels again. Also I was told that a GLEP for this is |
15 |
> overkill. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> All this is addressed and working with the current arch testers procedure. |
18 |
> The plan is to just treat Sunrise trusted committers the same as arch or |
19 |
> herd testers. The difference is that they operate on ebuilds of all |
20 |
> flavours that interest themself in the sunrise overlay and not on a certain |
21 |
> herd of packages. Neither do they focus on testing for a specific |
22 |
> architecture. Just coding is their work, not testing - which explains the |
23 |
> difference in the name. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> Now how do people feel about this approach? |
26 |
> |
27 |
As there's been very little, if any, interest from anybody besides |
28 |
Stefan and Recruiters / Developer Relations I'm going to deny the |
29 |
contributor access idea. Recruiters and Developer Relations feels that |
30 |
this is a bad idea, especially seeing how hard it has been to reach any |
31 |
kind of resolution regarding who should get access and how we should |
32 |
solve the problems that I've outlined earlier. |
33 |
|
34 |
Regards, |
35 |
Bryan Østergaard |
36 |
-- |
37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |