Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] RFC: "Trusted contributor model"
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 19:54:23
Message-Id: B5KZKPZQ.5JNKGTAA.LLONTYBL@TEOFJW24.ZZQUYIDC.SX7DEB7R
In Reply to: [gentoo-project] RFC: "Trusted contributor model" by Joonas Niilola
1 On 2022.07.22 12:56, Joonas Niilola wrote:
2 > Cross-posting to gentoo-dev and -project lists due to technical and
3 > non-technical nature. Reply-to is set to -project.
4 >
5 > Once again new council has been elected: congratulations to the chosen
6 > members! And once again many nominees expressed their wishes to see
7 > more
8 > non-developer contributors to become official developers. Yet, only
9 > very
10 > few people (if any) are interested in mentoring them. I get it, the
11 > relationship between a mentor and their mentee is very intimate, and
12 > mentoring takes a lot of time. While the Github PRs are helping us
13 > increase the user contributions merged, perhaps it's distancing us
14 > from
15 > creating stronger bonds with the contributors? But more about this
16 > topic
17 > later.
18 >
19 >
20 > 1st RFC: "Trusted contributor model"
21 >
22 > I'm proposing us to giving special commit access to our well-reputable
23 > contributors (mostly proxied maintainers). They'd have access _only_
24 > to
25 > their maintained package in git-tree. To understand what I mean, check
26 > git shortlog -s -n net-im/telegram-desktop-bin/
27 > git shortlog -s -n net-im/signal-desktop-bin/
28 >
29 > There are few packages like these where I'd already trust the core
30 > proxied maintainer to commit at their will. It's as ajak said during
31 > the
32 > council election; _We_ are the bottleneck currently reviewing and
33 > _testing_ contributions, and with these two examples above, 99 % of
34 > time
35 > everything's in condition and we just need to merge. Obviously if
36 > these
37 > trusted contributors had to touch another package, or anything in
38 > profiles/ (just basically anything outside their dedicated package
39 > directory) they'd have to do a PR or .patch file to be merged by
40 > official developers. And they'd still need a proxy Gentoo
41 > developer/project listed in metadata, at least for now, to take
42 > responsibility.
43 >
44 > On the technical side I'm not sure how to achieve this, but I know it
45 > can be done. For example the sync-repos are compiled like this all the
46 > time. If this proposal gains support, I'm willing to start figuring it
47 > out more in-depth.
48 >
49 > AFAIK Fedora and Arch have somewhat similar systems in place already.
50
51 Try it and see.
52 Once access had been granted. Who is responsible for monitoring?
53 I would expect it to be the dev that usually made the commits but
54 due to the trust model, more or a random sample basis.
55
56 The access can be revoked, if required, so it seems to be a win/win.
57
58 Are these trusted contributors devs?
59 e.g. accounts on Woodpecker, standing/voting in council elections
60 and so on?
61
62
63 >
64 >
65 > 2nd RFC: Recruiting proven contributors without a mentor
66 >
67 > I'm aware recruiters don't really need to ask a permission here, but I
68 > believe it's great to gauge the general feelings about this
69 > beforehand.
70 > What would you say if recruiters started more actively approaching
71 > potential developers? And currently I'm talking about people who have
72 > been active for a very long time (+year or two), who keep up with
73 > development-wise changes in Gentoo (eclasses, EAPI, virtuals...),
74 > participate in the community, and always provide top-quality
75 > contributions, but for some reason never got a mentor? I'd like to
76 > point
77 > out that this method would only be for the very few ones and
78 > recruiting
79 > through mentoring would still be the desired method. Recruiting
80 > through
81 > recruiters would still require the candidate to fill the
82 > ebuild/developer quiz, and they'd have to pass it without a mentor. So
83 > I'll emphasize: Currently only few special ones would qualify.
84 >
85 > But seeing the general lack of interest towards mentoring, maybe this
86 > is
87 > something we _need_ to do in near future.
88
89 I'm more on the fence on this one. The mentors job does not stop
90 when recruitments completes. The mentor is still required to keep a
91 weather eye on progress for another six months.
92
93 How does the post recruitment mentoring happen with no mentor?
94 I can see how it works with the subjects in RFQ 1 ... they have
95 been mentored since they obtained their trusted status but what
96 about others?
97
98 >
99 > -- juippis
100 >
101
102 --
103 Regards,
104
105 Roy Bamford
106 (Neddyseagoon) a member of
107 elections
108 gentoo-ops
109 forum-mods
110 arm64

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] RFC: "Trusted contributor model" Joonas Niilola <juippis@g.o>