1 |
Tomáš Chvátal <scarabeus@g.o> said: |
2 |
> [tinderbox] |
3 |
> guys working on tinderbox and reading the logs and opening bugs, if time |
4 |
> allows also fixes them. |
5 |
> (all tinderbox bugs will be required to be addressed by maintainer in |
6 |
> long term) |
7 |
|
8 |
Not sure how many people know about it, but there is already a git repo |
9 |
for Diego's scripts: |
10 |
|
11 |
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/flameeyes-tinderbox.git;a=summary |
12 |
|
13 |
Having more people run this on different archs and that would be |
14 |
awesome. |
15 |
|
16 |
> [daywatch/nightwatch] |
17 |
> guys following on -commits and checking if someone does not break the |
18 |
> tree :] Usually fixing themselves or slapping maintainer to do so |
19 |
> (privately not on -dev, everyone has a bad day :]) |
20 |
|
21 |
I like the idea of us more proactively doing code reviews of changes, |
22 |
but for this to be effective we are going to need a nice sized bunch of |
23 |
people to do it. |
24 |
|
25 |
> [amish] |
26 |
> puritans :] these guys will proactively check the main tree for qa |
27 |
> issues using various tools and removing everything that does not fit in |
28 |
> :] (patches/ebuild-coding/whitespace fixes/...). |
29 |
|
30 |
This is one that I've been trying to do with the help of a few of you, |
31 |
and its a lot harder than it sounds, but something I see as being |
32 |
worthwhile as well. If we can cut down on the noise from all of the |
33 |
simple issues that shouldn't exist, we can start making more interesting |
34 |
and strict checks. |
35 |
|
36 |
> [treecleaners] |
37 |
> Guys responsible for maintaining profiles and removing packages that |
38 |
> in long-term fails to meet up QA standards. |
39 |
|
40 |
Samuli already said it, and I agree, that these guys should worry about |
41 |
packages instead of profiles. The overall QA team should worry about |
42 |
the profiles. |
43 |
|
44 |
> [overtakers] |
45 |
> guys responsible for unmaintained Gentoo areas. They are not actually |
46 |
> maintaining the things, but motivating users to work on those areas and |
47 |
> possibly thanks to those actions the team gets out overtakers overview |
48 |
|
49 |
Again, another great idea of something we should implement and move |
50 |
towards motivating others to help us in keeping the tree sane and up to |
51 |
date. |
52 |
|
53 |
> [backbone] |
54 |
> scripters, writing all those fancy tools we could use to do above tasks |
55 |
|
56 |
Not sure if this needs to be its own split out team, or that those that |
57 |
join the other areas would already have some of those abilities, or |
58 |
someone in that team already would. |
59 |
|
60 |
> [QA] |
61 |
> all of us should provide help and support to fellow devs when they have |
62 |
> some migration up ahead, and we should promote that they should ask us |
63 |
> first before trying to do some mass changes |
64 |
|
65 |
Definitely, and I think we need to expand a bit more on this one, with |
66 |
regards to big changes and involving QA. |
67 |
|
68 |
> So what do ya think? |
69 |
|
70 |
A lot of great ideas. We should probably come up with some well |
71 |
defined roles for each group, like we do for treecleaners, that expand |
72 |
upon the above ideas. |
73 |
|
74 |
-- |
75 |
Mark Loeser |
76 |
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org |
77 |
email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com |
78 |
web - http://www.halcy0n.com |