| 1 |
As another invisible AT, theres a couple of points I want to make about |
| 2 |
blanket blacklisting: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
1. gentoo-dev has an outside image. The current, anyone-can-post, |
| 5 |
projects the image that the developers are happy to receive outside |
| 6 |
opinions that may be different to 'how things are done'. This is, |
| 7 |
mostly, a good thing. More ideas can only improve the technical quality |
| 8 |
of gentoo, even if those ideas are discarded. Moderating -dev will only |
| 9 |
reinforce the image of cliquiness within the developers. This is bad. |
| 10 |
2. It will kill recruitment. This point has been made before, iirc. |
| 11 |
3. A dilbert quote (paraphrase?) comes to mind - 'Something must be |
| 12 |
done. This is something, so we must do it' |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Personally, I agree with ttuttle's idea about being able to whitelist |
| 15 |
non-devs - a blanket blacklist is simply not the way to do it - people |
| 16 |
do not have to be developers to contribute to gentoo. I can also see the |
| 17 |
benefit of introducing -project and waiting to see what happens. When |
| 18 |
you introduce lots of changes to a software project at once, and |
| 19 |
something breaks, you do not know what broke it. It pays to introduce |
| 20 |
things one at a time and testing between. The same can be applied here. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Simon Cooper |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Change the world - move a rock |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
GnuPG Key: http://thecoop.me.uk/gpgkey.asc |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives