Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for April

[Petteri Räty]

Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto kirjoitti:
> Petteri Räty wrote:
>
> I agree with the above point.
> Also, as I recall, both Pettery (betelgeuse) and Denis (calchan) have
> stated before that we no longer have any queue of people waiting on
> recruiters to join Gentoo. I'm not seeing an avalanche of new blood
> entering the distro, so I'm wondering where we want to go.
> If we keep going the route of the last months, I wonder how long it will
> take until we get under 150 devs. I don't think this will benefit
> anyone. Furthermore, the trend in the last months was in large part the
> result of finally retiring people that had been slacking for a long
> time. This proposal could (would?) lead to sending away people that
> still do work, albeit at a slower pace or on bursts.
>

We do have somewhat of a backlog at this point because Calchan was away 
for a while and you can always query bugzilla for the current situation.

>
> As others have commented, I don't agree with this point. Also, you're
> forgetting we have quite a few people working on this project and that
> we have many different roles.
 >

And you are assuming that undertakers wouldn't check their role before 
acting.

> Recalling previous discussions about work on gentoo and some of the
> existing roles, what will you do to AT folks, release members or QA
> members? Are they also obliged to do a weekly commit to keep their
> "privileges"?

AT folks aren't devs and see above.

> Finally, I thought the whole point of removing access to infra boxes
> (which is the end result of retiring a dev), was a concern with security
> and not a way to get rid of people - with the exception of
> administrative action by devrel.

Security and gives us a better picture on what is really maintained and 
what is not.

>
> I understand and agree that ebuild devs should keep a minimum level of
> work to justify their access to the gentoo-x86 tree. I would also like
> to have a few devs that can do major commits (although commit sprees can
> have their own problems), but I think there's still a place in this
> distro for people that want to maintain a few packages, that want to do
> AT work, that care with the QA of the tree or that work on releases.
> These people shouldn't be sent away, just because they can't keep with
> weekly commits (not enough work or time?) or because they work in bursts.
>

To quote myself:
"How does having the average time between commits be at most a week 
sound and if it goes under that, undertakers will get a notification?"

I didn't suggest they have to commit every week. This means 4 commits a 
month instead of the currently monthly or bimonthly commit check in the 
script.

>
> As a final thought, I think this point is a tangent to the old debate
> about tree-wide commit privileges and or the scm of the tree. Afterall,
> if gentoo-x86 was a git tree and or we had acls in the tree, I don't
> think we would be having or would need to have this argument.
>

If we used git, proxy maintaining would be easier.

Regards,
Petteri