| 1 |
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Markos, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 5 |
>> This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you |
| 6 |
>> intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you |
| 7 |
>> are doing a great work. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Everything in the Gentoo project is per definition strictly |
| 10 |
> developer-only. I suppose that it's a function of having the |
| 11 |
> project centered around a foundation. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I can't think of any reason that the Foundation would have anything to |
| 14 |
do with who can and cannot participate in anything related to Gentoo. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Gentoo projects have involved non-developers from time to time. The |
| 17 |
documentation project even gives commit access to non-developers, and |
| 18 |
arch testers have elevated privileges in bugzilla. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The way our current portage tree is set up basically forces us into an |
| 21 |
all-or-nothing security model for commit access - we don't have layers |
| 22 |
of integration testing to protect users from errors or abuses. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Proxy maintainership is one way around this. I think there are many |
| 25 |
here who would love to see more non-developer contribution. |
| 26 |
Suggestions are always welcome, and those willing to put in effort to |
| 27 |
make the suggestions happen are probably even more welcome. Moving to |
| 28 |
git certainly won't hurt, but that won't automatically change anything |
| 29 |
either. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Rich |
Archives