1 |
On Wednesday, July 19, 2017 1:34:52 PM EDT Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
2 |
> On 18/07/17 05:40 PM, Michał Górny wrote: |
3 |
> > On wto, 2017-07-18 at 22:35 +0100, M. J. Everitt wrote: |
4 |
> >> On 18/07/17 22:23, Kent Fredric wrote: |
5 |
> >>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 22:12:45 +0100 |
6 |
> >>> |
7 |
> >>> "M. J. Everitt" <m.j.everitt@×××.org> wrote: |
8 |
> >>>> I think mgorny was doing some general commit stats, and I have yet to |
9 |
> >>>> compile my own, but it would be very interesting to see how many |
10 |
> >>>> 'active' team members there were in any given project. I suspect the |
11 |
> >>>> results could be very telling ... |
12 |
> >>> |
13 |
> >>> Its not even like they're "inactive", they're just not active *in the |
14 |
> >>> team*. |
15 |
> >>> |
16 |
> >>> For some, there's no reason for them to devaway: |
17 |
> >>> |
18 |
> >>> - They're on IRC |
19 |
> >>> - They commit daily |
20 |
> >>> |
21 |
> >>> But they're on teams they seldom do things in. |
22 |
> >>> |
23 |
> >>> This is probably more true the more teams you're on. |
24 |
> >> |
25 |
> >> Then why are you 'in' the team.. I mean, there's one thing to idle on an |
26 |
> >> IRC channel, but membership does normally imply some form of |
27 |
> >> contribution, no? Or is it just to make you 'look' |
28 |
> >> interested/popular/part-of-the-furniture .... |
29 |
> > |
30 |
> > Well, that *is* a problem. However, we are supposed to be friendly |
31 |
> > and nice, and not tell other developers that they have done literally |
32 |
> > nothing during the 2 years they're part of some project. That could |
33 |
> > discourage them from contributing. |
34 |
> |
35 |
> OK, so here's the flipside of this. I'm a member of a few projects |
36 |
> because I help take care of just a couple of things or maybe even just |
37 |
> a gentoo-carried patch. Being a project member is necessary as I do |
38 |
> want to have the commit rights on the project, but I'm -not- nor ever |
39 |
> meant to be a general project member or overall maintainer or dev. |
40 |
> |
41 |
> So does that mean I should remove myself from these projects? Or |
42 |
> maybe do we just need some sort of 'occasional contributor' status to |
43 |
> the project membership? Or should things just stay as they are? |
44 |
|
45 |
Developers receive commit rights across the tree once they pass their ebuild |
46 |
quiz and are onboarded. The ability to make an "acceptable" commit is based |
47 |
upon your membership to a particular project. If you do not feel you are a |
48 |
"general project member" then work with the particular project you are |
49 |
attempting to help. I *doubt* they will deny you the ability to commit on |
50 |
their behalf. Let's not attempt to define yet another category of contribution |
51 |
in order to make people feel welcome. |
52 |
|
53 |
Work with people. |
54 |
|
55 |
-Aaron |