| 1 |
On 6/15/19 11:49 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 12:42:20 +0300 Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Hi all! |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> Last year we had a good initiative: it addition to (or even instead |
| 6 |
>> of) manifests nominees were asked questions by voters. So let's |
| 7 |
>> continue this year. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> I propose to have one question per thread spawned by this e-mail to |
| 10 |
>> keep discussion focused. If you have multiple questions, please |
| 11 |
>> start multiple threads. If your question was already asked, please |
| 12 |
>> join a thread. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> I'll ask my questions in subsequent e-mails. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> In my opinion GLEP 76 is the most controversial decision made by |
| 17 |
> running council. While it fixed some long standing issues like |
| 18 |
> copyright headers and proper acknowledgement of out of the tree |
| 19 |
> contributors, it created grave problems: now some long-time |
| 20 |
> contributors and even developer are seriously discriminated because |
| 21 |
> they want to keep their privacy. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> What is your opinion on this problem? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I think everyone involved in the discussion meant well, but different |
| 26 |
cultural starting points (e.g. different ideas about what copyright |
| 27 |
means), trying to find a compromise, not being experienced with legal |
| 28 |
language/concepts (or even legal concepts not translating well between |
| 29 |
languages) etc.etc. conspired to make this a very weirdly shaped thing |
| 30 |
that imo doesn't do what people think it does. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
I mostly ignored the discussion because it was a too high volume of |
| 33 |
email on a topic where I don't see a strong need to act, in hindsight |
| 34 |
that was naive optimism on my side. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
> Should GLEP 76 be left as is? |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
No,it should be improved. |
| 39 |
E.g. having signed commits, and adding signed-off-by, is ... weird. |
| 40 |
It also leads to semantic satiation, where every commit has |
| 41 |
signed-off-by, every commit, signed-off-by, signed-off-by ... |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
And since it's autogenerated it doesn't really mean anything. It would |
| 44 |
make more sense to add it *only* to commits from not-gentoo-devs, since |
| 45 |
all the other commits are already signed by authenticated users. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
> Should GLEP 76 be cancelled? |
| 48 |
> Should GLEP 76 be improved and how? |
| 49 |
See above :) |
Archives