| 1 |
On 11:35 Thu 03 Apr , Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: |
| 2 |
> Petteri R??ty wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto kirjoitti: |
| 4 |
>>> Petteri R??ty wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> |
| 7 |
>>> As others have commented, I don't agree with this point. Also, you're |
| 8 |
>>> forgetting we have quite a few people working on this project and that we |
| 9 |
>>> have many different roles. |
| 10 |
>> > |
| 11 |
>> And you are assuming that undertakers wouldn't check their role before |
| 12 |
>> acting. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I read it as a rule to drop developers. If we're only talking about it |
| 15 |
> raising a warning to undertakers so they can check the dev status, then I |
| 16 |
> don't have a problem with the proposal. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
>>> Recalling previous discussions about work on gentoo and some of the |
| 19 |
>>> existing roles, what will you do to AT folks, release members or QA |
| 20 |
>>> members? Are they also obliged to do a weekly commit to keep their |
| 21 |
>>> "privileges"? |
| 22 |
>> AT folks aren't devs and see above. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> To be clear, I didn't meant arch testers but people that do keywords for |
| 25 |
> arch teams. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Actually, 'AT' can refer to either arch teams or Arch Testers, but given |
| 28 |
the fact that he was referring to those people with commit access, it |
| 29 |
should be obvious he meant 'Arch Teams'. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Thomas |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives