Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-project
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-project: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-project@g.o
From: Sebastian Pipping <sping@g.o>
Subject: Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2010 14:32:47 +0200
Jorge,


On 07/03/10 02:26, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>> I wonder if we could start making a stronger distinction between these
>> two cases of retirement.  If it isn't a throw-out I would prefer to have
>> that made so very clear that no one ever feels thrown out that way.
>> Especially that there's no guarantee to be allowed to return feels a bit
>> odd to me.
> 
> please read the undertakers page and the resolution of the retirement
> bugs carefully as you seem to be confused about our policy to retired
> developers.

Confused about what exactly?


> The only case where re-admittance is subject to particular
> scrutiny is when a developer is retired for disciplinary reasons. As you
> can read in the second email template[1], we specifically inform the
> developer that:
> 
> "If we do retire you, it's pretty easy to come back when you are ready.
> Just do the ebuild/end-quiz again and you're back on. You also always
> have the option of contributing as your schedule allows via proxy or
> bugzilla."
> 
> We also make sure to mention in the retirement bugs that a developer can
> always return as seen on an example bug[2]. My apologies to Caleb to
> link directly to his bug, but I needed one concrete reply to show
> undertakers work.

Agreed, it could be worse.  I would personally not trust on "you can
come back any time" though and looking forward to another round of
ebuild quizzes doesn't sound inviting to me either (not saying that
developers don't need to be up to date with Gentoo).  I'm not sure if
I'm really the most or only sensitive person in Gentoo if that's coming
to your mind now.

Let me quote an excerpt by another developer.  When I stumbled upon his
inactivity-based retirement bug I was asking if he really means to
retire.  He said:

  "If Gentoo likes to retire me, fine.  I won't stop them.
   I don't think, this will will help Gentoo get back on
   track, though, if there is a way back at all."

So I don't seem to be the only one having a bad impression of our
current concepts of retirement.  Do you read it differently?

Before I propose anything: What ways do you see to improve our concept
and realization of retirement?

Best,



Sebastian


References:
Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
-- PaweĊ‚ Hajdan, Jr.
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
-- Steve Dibb
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
-- Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
-- Sebastian Pipping
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
-- Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
-- Sebastian Pipping
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
-- Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-project: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
Next by thread:
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
Previous by date:
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
Next by date:
GLEP 23 seems to be implemented


Updated Jul 05, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-project mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.