1 |
I disagree with fast-tracking this to any official Gentoo |
2 |
documentation. |
3 |
|
4 |
> Be considerate. Your work will be used by other people, and you in |
5 |
> turn will depend on the work of others. Any decision you make will |
6 |
> affect users and colleagues, and we expect you to take those |
7 |
> consequences into account when making decisions. |
8 |
|
9 |
All of this is obvious, except for who is "we"? |
10 |
|
11 |
> Be respectful. The Gentoo community and its members treat one |
12 |
> another with respect. |
13 |
|
14 |
Odd to make this declarative statement when it isn't true. |
15 |
|
16 |
> Everyone can make a valuable contribution to Gentoo. |
17 |
|
18 |
They can? Making this kind of feel-good blanket statement just |
19 |
detracts from the rest of this document. |
20 |
|
21 |
> We may not always agree, but disagreement is no excuse for |
22 |
> poor behaviour and poor manners. We might all experience some |
23 |
> frustration now and then, but we cannot allow that frustration to |
24 |
> turn into a personal attacks. It's important to remember that |
25 |
> a community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not |
26 |
> a productive one. |
27 |
|
28 |
This should be shortened to say just what it means: Developers will |
29 |
have more fun, be more productive, and create a better distribution if |
30 |
we concentrate on the issues instead of resorting to personal attacks. |
31 |
|
32 |
> We expect members of the Gentoo community to be |
33 |
> respectful when dealing with other contributors as well as with |
34 |
> people outside the Gentoo project, and with users of Gentoo. |
35 |
|
36 |
Again, who is "we"? |
37 |
|
38 |
> Be collaborative. Gentoo and Free Software are about collaboration |
39 |
> and working together. Collaboration reduces redundancy of work done |
40 |
> in the Free Software world, and improves the quality of the software |
41 |
> produced. You should aim to collaborate with other Gentoo |
42 |
> maintainers, as well as with the upstream community that is |
43 |
> interested in the work you do. Your work should be done |
44 |
> transparently and patches from Gentoo should be given back to the |
45 |
> community when they are made, not just when the distribution |
46 |
> releases. If you wish to work on new code for existing upstream |
47 |
> projects, at least keep those projects informed of your ideas and |
48 |
> progress. It may not be possible to get consensus from upstream or |
49 |
> even from your colleagues about the correct implementation of an |
50 |
> idea, so don't feel obliged to have that agreement before you begin, |
51 |
> but at least keep the outside world informed of your work, and |
52 |
> publish your work in a way that allows outsiders to test, discuss |
53 |
> and contribute to your efforts. |
54 |
|
55 |
This part makes sense, I think... though I don't see the point of |
56 |
codifying it except to "throw the book" at the next Paludis. Frankly |
57 |
I think Ciaran did nothing wrong to restrict distribution on a project |
58 |
he didn't feel was ready for public consumption. It has always seemed |
59 |
to me like the overreactions were the problem. |
60 |
|
61 |
> When you disagree, consult others. Disagreements, both political and |
62 |
> technical, happen all the time and the Gentoo community is no |
63 |
> exception. The important goal is not to avoid disagreements or |
64 |
> differing views but to resolve them constructively. You should turn |
65 |
> to the community and to the community process to seek advice and to |
66 |
> resolve disagreements. We have the Council, Infra, Devrel and Team |
67 |
> Leaders all of which help you decide the right course for Gentoo. |
68 |
|
69 |
What do you mean by "turn to the community and to the community |
70 |
process"? I'm not sure what that entails. And I'm really not sure |
71 |
I understand what the last sentence means. |
72 |
|
73 |
> Repeated disruptive behaviors will be viewed as a security and |
74 |
> stability threat to Gentoo. |
75 |
|
76 |
Classic switching to the passive voice when the actor wishes to be |
77 |
distanced from the action. WHO will view these behaviors as |
78 |
a security and stability threat to Gentoo? Is this a statement the |
79 |
existing developers are making? The foundation? Infra? |
80 |
|
81 |
> Your access to Gentoo infrastructure may |
82 |
> be suspended without notice if it is deemed that you fall into this |
83 |
> category. |
84 |
|
85 |
Again passive voice. WHO will suspect access without notice? WHO |
86 |
will make the decision? (Clearly infra will implement it.) And |
87 |
doesn't "without notice" somehow void the "consult others" bit |
88 |
earlier? |
89 |
|
90 |
> If your account is suspended, you will still retain full |
91 |
> developer status -- you will simply not have access to Gentoo |
92 |
> infrastructure. You may continue to do development work during your |
93 |
> suspension. |
94 |
|
95 |
This is bogus. If a person's account is suspended, they don't have |
96 |
commit access, they're temporarily not a developer. Mincing words |
97 |
doesn't change things. |
98 |
|
99 |
> You may elect to save up your changes until such a point |
100 |
> where your access has been reinstated, or you may work with another |
101 |
> developer to have them commit changes on your behalf. If you choose |
102 |
> the latter option, please ensure members of the Infrastructure |
103 |
> project have reviewed and approved the proxy relationship to avoid |
104 |
> having access cut off for both developers. |
105 |
|
106 |
Anybody can submit work to a developer who can proxy that work into |
107 |
Gentoo. What is this new proxy approval process that Infra has |
108 |
decided to enforce? |
109 |
|
110 |
> If your account is suspended, you may request a hearing with |
111 |
> developer relations which can then make recommendation that your |
112 |
> account be re-instated or permanently disabled if they are unable to |
113 |
> address the problem with your behavior with you. |
114 |
|
115 |
Clearly this sentence states that Infra has usurped the suspension |
116 |
process. It's very disappointing since Devrel has put so much work |
117 |
into a process that has been demoted to "recommendation" status. |
118 |
|
119 |
Aron |
120 |
-- |
121 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |