| 1 |
On 04/12/2015 12:02 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sunday 12 April 2015 11:59:09 hasufell wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 04/11/2015 01:54 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> 1. What does proxy-maintainers lack in comparison to sunrise |
| 5 |
>>> exclusively. The immediate question is whether sunrise should be |
| 6 |
>>> migrated to proxy-maintainers, so this specific comparison is |
| 7 |
>>> important. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> proxy-maintainers lack: |
| 10 |
>> 1. a repository with a usable VCS |
| 11 |
>> 2. an actual review workflow... @proxy-maintainers are just some sort of |
| 12 |
>> backup committers. it's not a hub for contributors to gather, discuss, |
| 13 |
>> get reviews and improve skills |
| 14 |
>> 3. means to ensure the tree doesn't break |
| 15 |
>> 4. actively look for and educate potential developers, even before the |
| 16 |
>> recruitment process |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Oh my. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Can you please stop being such a drama queen and accept reality every now and |
| 21 |
> then? |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I am unable to see how that contributes anything to the discussion. |
| 25 |
Could you please stay on the factual level? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
>> So it should, if at all, be the other way around: dissolve |
| 30 |
>> proxy-maintainers, fix the sunrise workflow and make it the contribution |
| 31 |
>> hub again it once was. But I'm not actually advocating for that. I think |
| 32 |
>> the sunrise concept doesn't work anymore. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> proxy-maint is the least broken process we have. Unless you have constructive |
| 35 |
> criticism I don't see why you waste time whining about everything. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
You have obviously not read the whole email. I did offer an alternative |
| 39 |
solution. Please read the whole text. |
Archives