| 1 |
Kurt Lieber wrote: |
| 2 |
> * Drop the idea of giving the arch testers an email alias altogether |
| 3 |
> I don't see what benefit this provides, to be honest. It's not much of a |
| 4 |
> spiff and if someone is signing up to help with testing just for the |
| 5 |
> email address, they're not here for the right reasons anyway. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I agree that if somebody signs up for an email address, he's in the wrong place. |
| 8 |
This issue is not new, it's the same with beeing a dev. Becoming an AT isn't |
| 9 |
easier than becoming dev: You've got a probation period of 30 days, you've got |
| 10 |
to do the staff and ebuild quizzes. On a side note, I don't think anybody |
| 11 |
considers the worth of a @g.o address so high that he would sign up only to gain |
| 12 |
the email address. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
On the other side, giving the ATs a @g.o address does make sense. It might be |
| 15 |
easier for other arches, but at least the amd64 team has quite a lot of them, |
| 16 |
and it's really difficult to keep all the cryptic email addresses in mind. I |
| 17 |
have to check our AT-List about 3 times a week to see whether a bug was filed by |
| 18 |
an AT which I can trust and which I know of what his system looks like, or if it |
| 19 |
is just average Joe. So to me, an email alias would make things easier, with or |
| 20 |
without subdomain |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> * Change @subdomain.gentoo.org to @gentoo.org. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> If we want to give them a spiff in recognition of their contribution to |
| 25 |
> the project, give them the real thing. We do this today for any number |
| 26 |
> of other non-developer groups, including GWN translators, documentation |
| 27 |
> translators, etc. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The original GLEP didn't foresee a subdomain, we actually wanted to give them a |
| 30 |
@g.o address, but it seemed that a lot of devs thought ATs were just a random |
| 31 |
bunch of incompetent users and as a consequence this, don't deserve a 'real' |
| 32 |
@g.o address. It made me quite sad, and I'm happy to see that I'm not the only |
| 33 |
one who thinks it would be better to not cut gentoo into different groups. |
| 34 |
However, the council asked for it, and so it was changed. And the council didn't |
| 35 |
ask for this on his own, they were just reflecting the majority of devs, so |
| 36 |
we'll have to accept that. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> * Create an entirely new domain |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
I don't really like this, and it seems at least equally complicated as |
| 41 |
subdomains. If that's really the way we (as in Gentoo) want to go, I'll happily |
| 42 |
continue to look up the AT page 3 times a week. It's really not a THAT big |
| 43 |
issue. I just thought it would be nice to give the ATs a @g.o address, but it's |
| 44 |
really not essentially for me to work. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Regards, |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
Simon Stelling |
| 50 |
Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead |
| 51 |
blubb@g.o |
| 52 |
-- |
| 53 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives