Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain

[Patrick McLean]

Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 09:09:29PM -0400, Luis F. Araujo wrote:
>
>>What is the problem of giving them @g.o addresses?
>>Why exactly do we need the distinction? (sorry, i can't see any benefit
>>but more confusion).
>
>
> The GLEP was originally created to help the architecture testers with a
> specific privilege: read-only CVS access. This would allow them to improve
> the quality of the ebuilds sooner, help the architecture teams identify
> working (and perhaps even more important, not-working) tools and perform
> tests on the global system to make sure the distribution is in top-notch
> shape.
>
Read-only CVS would make my life easier, as others have said it would 
let me keep up to date without risking being banned for rsyncing every 
30 minutes.

> The e-mail address was not that important, but was decided to bring it in
> "the package" because it would be some sort of appreciation to those users.
>
I agree, the email address is certainly not necessary, but as a couple 
of devs have mentioned before, it might make identifying arch testers in 
b.g.o easier. I don't know what the implementation details would be, but 
maybe making a flag for arch testers in bugzilla could serve that 
purpose as well.

> One general idea was that arch testers wouldn't be developers because they
> have no formal obligation to the Gentoo project: we don't expect them to put
> in x hours a week in Gentoo, read the gentoo-core and -dev mailinglists or
> even catch up with most of the events that happen in Gentoo (like GLEPs and
> such). This is also a request from the arch testers, because many of them
> *can't* devote much time to Gentoo anyway.

I don't and can't read -core, but I do keep an eye on -dev. I try to put 
what time I can into testing, but realistically I don't have huge 
volumes of free time, though I am hoping to eventually be a full dev.

>
> PS I would be quite surprised if there is *one* arch tester who feels good
>    with this entire thread; it doesn't show of much appreciation between
>    people. There is a huge difference between saying that a group has "made
>    an unfortunate decision" or "did not grasp the essence of the proposal
>    and situation needed to make a good decision", and "abuse of powers".
>
> PPS

This thread has had a disturbing amount of bickering, and there appears 
to be a bit of a sentiment that arch testers don't contribute anything 
more than a normal user. I have filed and commented on more bugs in the 
week since I became an arch tester than I had total in the 3 years I 
have been using Gentoo before that.

The email addresses are also a side point of this whole discussion, it 
won't make testing anywhere near as much easier as ro CVS access would.
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list