| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Stephen P. Becker wrote: |
| 5 |
>> My understanding is that this GLEP is supposed to make AT as good as |
| 6 |
>> being a dev, but with a different role, one that doesn't need commit |
| 7 |
>> access. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> My point exactly! Why have another category? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Because their role is *not* to develop, its to *test*. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
>> If the people involved decide they want to become committing |
| 15 |
>> devs, it also make it easier to make that transition. If they don't |
| 16 |
>> want to commit, they can stay as an AT. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Then shall we reclassify all the developers that currently don't have |
| 19 |
> commit access to the portage tree? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
No, *their* role is to be develop, not test. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
To have or not to have commit access is not the question. To develop or |
| 24 |
to test (and get recognized for it as well) is the question. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Nathan |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 29 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
iD8DBQFDJiGw2QTTR4CNEQARAhZuAJ9BRRr+9baj3kAcEU1LrUr8AyjZPwCfbEt6 |
| 32 |
EzqISNCg69GwNNew2jJoYdM= |
| 33 |
=kGey |
| 34 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives