| 1 |
Stop. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Is introduction of such a high level of bureaucracy really a good idea? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
In my eyes it could backfire and make matters worse as people either |
| 6 |
- start ignoring it due to high noise |
| 7 |
- reduce people's activity below set permissions |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
To summarize presented proposal has a few points that may not work well |
| 10 |
with humans. To my understanding we have the assumption in Gentoo that |
| 11 |
a Gentoo dev is at least willing to use his brain most of the time. To |
| 12 |
me such a machine only makes sense when assuming the opposite(!) |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
So I would like to propose a much more loose and simple approach: A |
| 15 |
distinction |
| 16 |
- between major and minor changes |
| 17 |
- need for prior interaction or not |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
A sensible default may differ from developer to developer. I propose |
| 20 |
collecting these defaults somewhere and make it overridable per |
| 21 |
maintainer per package in metadata.xml (just as robbat2 did). |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
One question to decide would be if access is allowed iff |
| 24 |
- no one is objecting or |
| 25 |
- everyone is acknowledging |
| 26 |
Once all defaults are collected the options are equal, before they are not. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
How to best handle herds is not clear to me in detail, yet. |
| 29 |
Anyone seing potential in this minimalistic with a natural extension on |
| 30 |
herds in mind? |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Sebastian |
Archives