| 1 |
On Friday 18 November 2005 06:15 pm, Jakub Moc wrote: |
| 2 |
> 19.11.2005, 1:38:03, Grant Goodyear wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Incidentally, the benefit is to make users who are actively helping |
| 4 |
> > Gentoo feel like they're part of the family. It was decided that a |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
So we give them an email account?? Is there any other purpose to that? We |
| 7 |
could kill this whole debate by just sticking with the way things work right |
| 8 |
now. The average "life" of an AT (before they turn full dev) is pretty short |
| 9 |
in most cases anyway, so giving them a subdomain email just to have to move |
| 10 |
it later is yet another administrative task that nobody has time for. Let |
| 11 |
alone the confusion that has already been discussed, and the questions that |
| 12 |
remain unanswered. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I am not against them having an email account if they deserve it, but if we |
| 15 |
want to give them an email account it should be an all-or-nothing (@g.o or |
| 16 |
not) thing. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Before deciding on such proposals, it might be also wise to consult infra |
| 19 |
> people who'll have to implement and maintain such things, IMHO. And, how |
| 20 |
> exactly will be people having multiple roles handled here - still missing a |
| 21 |
> clear answer... |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Jakub++ Nobody in infra is on board with this idea, so you will be hard |
| 24 |
pressed to find someone willing to implement it. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> I'm *not* against the concept of arch testers at all, in fact I find this |
| 27 |
> idea pretty beneficial, but why do we need to complicate things and why do |
| 28 |
> we need to create third-level domain emails for that? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Why not ditch the idea of yellow-starred "arch testers" and make it easy for |
| 31 |
*all* users to participate in the stability-validation of all of our |
| 32 |
packages? Make a site where users can profile their systems and "check off" |
| 33 |
the ~arch packages that work for each system on an online copy of the package |
| 34 |
repository. fex, Package X has 2,000 thumbs-up and no bugs reported, it |
| 35 |
should be safe to bump it... No email accounts needed, and users and devs |
| 36 |
alike can participate the same, whether they run just a single package ~arch |
| 37 |
or multiple full-on systems. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
This idea comes from a user in his blog: |
| 40 |
http://blogs.zymeta.com/roller/page/dr?entry=kde_3_4_3 |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
(we could easily implement such a system and keep AT's around, I'm just bent |
| 43 |
on the sudden changes they are requiring to the rest of the way Gentoo works) |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Cheers, |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
-Corey |
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives