Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 19:45:32
Message-Id: 1515613522.918.4.camel@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list by Alec Warner
1 W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 14∶31 -0500, użytkownik Alec Warner
2 napisał:
3 > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
4 >
5 > > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 09∶11 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner
6 > > napisał:
7 > > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
8 > > > > W dniu wto, 09.01.2018 o godzinie 17∶08 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner
9 > > > > napisał:
10 > > > > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Andreas K. Huettel <
11 > >
12 > > dilfridge@g.o> wrote:
13 > > > > > > During the last Gentoo council meeting, the decision was made to
14 > >
15 > > implement
16 > > > > > > changes to the gentoo-dev mailing list [1].
17 > > > > > >
18 > > > > > > These changes affect only the gentoo-dev mailing list, and will
19 > >
20 > > come into
21 > > > > > > effect on 23 January 2018.
22 > > > > > >
23 > > > > > > * Subscribing to the list and receiving list mail remains as it is
24 > >
25 > > now.
26 > > > > > > * Posting to the list will only be possible to Gentoo developers
27 > >
28 > > and
29 > > > > > > whitelisted additional participants.
30 > > > > > > * Whitelisting requires that one developer vouches for you. We
31 > >
32 > > intend this
33 > > > > > > to be as unbureaucratic as possible.
34 > > > > > > * Obviously, repeated off-topic posting as well as behaviour
35 > >
36 > > against the
37 > > > > > > Code of Conduct [2] will lead to revocation of the posting
38 > >
39 > > permission.
40 > > > > > >
41 > > > > > > If, as a non-developer, you want to participate in a discussion on
42 > > > > > > gentoo-dev,
43 > > > > > > - either reply directly to the author of a list mail and ask
44 > >
45 > > him/her to
46 > > > > > > forward your message,
47 > > > > > > - or ask any Gentoo developer of your choice to get you
48 > >
49 > > whitelisted.
50 > > > > > >
51 > > > > > > If, as a developer, you want to have someone whitelisted, please
52 > >
53 > > comment on
54 > > > > > > bug 644070 [3]. Similar to Bugzilla editbugs permission, if you
55 > >
56 > > are vouching
57 > > > > > > for a contributor you are expected to keep an eye on their
58 > >
59 > > activity.
60 > > > > >
61 > > > > > It seems like the obvious way this fails is some Gentoo developer
62 > >
63 > > acks
64 > > > > > one of the problem people. I don't think that's particularly
65 > >
66 > > unlikely.
67 > > > > > Then what do we do?
68 > > > > >
69 > > > >
70 > > > > Then it becomes comrel business.
71 > > >
72 > > > If that was an effective solution, wouldn't the problem already be
73 > >
74 > > solved?
75 > >
76 > > One of the problems mentioned before was that a person could easily
77 > > evade the ban via subscribing from another e-mail address. In this case
78 > > it's no longer possible, as he would need to obtain the vouching for his
79 > > new e-mail address, and for that he would first have to have something
80 > > positive to post.
81 > >
82 > > Of course this relies on developers not vouching for new people out of
83 > > the blue but expecting them to have something to contribute first.
84 > >
85 >
86 > This sounds like an amazing fundraising opportunity.
87 >
88 > https://www.gentoo.org/donate/
89 >
90 > Get membership posting privs.
91 >
92
93 I should point out that even as a joke this is highly inappropriate.
94
95 --
96 Best regards,
97 Michał Górny