1 |
W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 09∶11 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner |
2 |
napisał: |
3 |
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> > W dniu wto, 09.01.2018 o godzinie 17∶08 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner |
5 |
> > napisał: |
6 |
> > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
> > > > During the last Gentoo council meeting, the decision was made to implement |
8 |
> > > > changes to the gentoo-dev mailing list [1]. |
9 |
> > > > |
10 |
> > > > These changes affect only the gentoo-dev mailing list, and will come into |
11 |
> > > > effect on 23 January 2018. |
12 |
> > > > |
13 |
> > > > * Subscribing to the list and receiving list mail remains as it is now. |
14 |
> > > > * Posting to the list will only be possible to Gentoo developers and |
15 |
> > > > whitelisted additional participants. |
16 |
> > > > * Whitelisting requires that one developer vouches for you. We intend this |
17 |
> > > > to be as unbureaucratic as possible. |
18 |
> > > > * Obviously, repeated off-topic posting as well as behaviour against the |
19 |
> > > > Code of Conduct [2] will lead to revocation of the posting permission. |
20 |
> > > > |
21 |
> > > > If, as a non-developer, you want to participate in a discussion on |
22 |
> > > > gentoo-dev, |
23 |
> > > > - either reply directly to the author of a list mail and ask him/her to |
24 |
> > > > forward your message, |
25 |
> > > > - or ask any Gentoo developer of your choice to get you whitelisted. |
26 |
> > > > |
27 |
> > > > If, as a developer, you want to have someone whitelisted, please comment on |
28 |
> > > > bug 644070 [3]. Similar to Bugzilla editbugs permission, if you are vouching |
29 |
> > > > for a contributor you are expected to keep an eye on their activity. |
30 |
> > > |
31 |
> > > It seems like the obvious way this fails is some Gentoo developer acks |
32 |
> > > one of the problem people. I don't think that's particularly unlikely. |
33 |
> > > Then what do we do? |
34 |
> > > |
35 |
> > |
36 |
> > Then it becomes comrel business. |
37 |
> |
38 |
> If that was an effective solution, wouldn't the problem already be solved? |
39 |
|
40 |
One of the problems mentioned before was that a person could easily |
41 |
evade the ban via subscribing from another e-mail address. In this case |
42 |
it's no longer possible, as he would need to obtain the vouching for his |
43 |
new e-mail address, and for that he would first have to have something |
44 |
positive to post. |
45 |
|
46 |
Of course this relies on developers not vouching for new people out of |
47 |
the blue but expecting them to have something to contribute first. |
48 |
|
49 |
-- |
50 |
Best regards, |
51 |
Michał Górny |