| 1 |
04.02.2014 23:47, Donnie Berkholz пишет: |
| 2 |
> On 18:57 Wed 29 Jan , justin wrote: |
| 3 |
>> He is joining us as staffer (for now, let's see what the future brings) |
| 4 |
>> to work on portage (the PM) development, where he already contributed code. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Anyone else think it ironic that we call actual developers "staffers" |
| 7 |
> while ebuild maintainers qualify as "developers"? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Note that I am arguing more for classifying the former as the latter |
| 10 |
> than vice versa. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I do not think so. Staffer can be designer, doc translator etc. Ebuild |
| 14 |
maintainance requires programming skill(at basic level, yes, but still). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
That's consistent terminology in Gentoo development, that existed for |
| 17 |
years, and i do not see some obvious reason to change it. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
'staffer' do not have access to gx-86, 'developer' has. |
| 20 |
Regarding distribution itself(as we know, base for Gentoo is a set of |
| 21 |
ebuilds, called portage tree, that contains in gx86) it is quite right |
| 22 |
terminology. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Best regards, Sergey Popov |
| 27 |
Gentoo developer |
| 28 |
Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead |
| 29 |
Gentoo Qt project lead |
| 30 |
Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead |
Archives