Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o>
To: Thierry Carrez <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 09:58:24
Message-Id: 128535107.20051119105545@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain by Thierry Carrez
1 19.11.2005, 10:31:23, Thierry Carrez wrote:
2
3 > Corey Shields wrote:
4
5 >>>Before deciding on such proposals, it might be also wise to consult infra
6 >>>people who'll have to implement and maintain such things, IMHO. And, how
7 >>>exactly will be people having multiple roles handled here - still missing a
8 >>>clear answer...
9 >>
10 >> Jakub++ Nobody in infra is on board with this idea, so you will be hard
11 >> pressed to find someone willing to implement it.
12
13 > What I find disturbing here is that nobody found the issue interesting
14 > enough to read the October Council decisions as to what was needed to be
15 > changed for the GLEP to be approved. But when, one month later, those
16 > requirements have been met and the GLEP approved, lots of people
17 > discover that the issue is interesting and complain about it (when it's
18 > a little too late to be changed).
19
20 Erm, what exactly could have been discussed, the revised GLEP being submitted
21 about a day before the council meeting? Are you expecting people to hang on
22 email 24/7?
23
24 > I'm losing faith in Gentoo. When the GLEP was first discussed, the
25 > general mood was that we shouldn't give ATs the same powers than we give
26 > to devs (in particular, no right to vote for the Council), and in
27 > consequence a need to tell them apart. The Council rejected the proposed
28 > GLEP in that sense. Now, the mood is like the Council want to yellowstar
29 > some part of our contributors... and the discussion happen on the same list.
30
31 > You can't just ignore the discussion and the iterim decisions and
32 > complain afterwards when the decision is taken.
33
34 I've already mentioned that I don't oppose to AT concept and making them
35 official Gentoo stuff (and a couple of people did that as well), but drawing
36 the distinction around an email address, resulting in troubles for
37 infrastructure and hassle for users/other devs has not been properly considered
38 apparently; still waiting for someone to show a single benefit of such an
39 arrangement.
40
41 Email address is a means of communication with people, not a *power*. If
42 anyone's interested in/does care for what's the exact role of that particular
43 person in Gentoo, that's what roll-call is for. AT or not, any person w/
44 @gentoo.org email address is representing Gentoo, users don't care what's the
45 difference between ATs, forums staff and full devs and I don't see why exactly
46 they should even care. Users also don't care if someone has CVS commit privs or
47 voting rights. These are internal Gentoo things, email address is not playing
48 any role in that.
49
50 Now, we might we perhaps move the focus to more important issues jstubbs
51 mentioned in his last email, expecting that any implementation of the now
52 approved GLEP wrt the email addresses won't be pushed in a similar way the
53 whole revised GLEP has been, until infra issues and usefulness of this are
54 sorted out/reconsidered at least.
55
56
57 --
58
59 jakub

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain Thierry Carrez <koon@g.o>