| 1 |
On 22.7.2022 22.53, Roy Bamford wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Try it and see. |
| 4 |
> Once access had been granted. Who is responsible for monitoring? |
| 5 |
> I would expect it to be the dev that usually made the commits but |
| 6 |
> due to the trust model, more or a random sample basis. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Yes, a @gentoo.org person/project is still required to be listed as a |
| 9 |
maintainer, and they take responsibility. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I imagine anyone can ask for the access to be revoked if they see the |
| 12 |
committing person causing more harm than good, and if there's a conflict |
| 13 |
between devs then QA can decide. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Are these trusted contributors devs? |
| 18 |
> e.g. accounts on Woodpecker, standing/voting in council elections |
| 19 |
> and so on? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
No. If my feeling how-to-make-this-work is correct, there's no need to |
| 22 |
setup an LDAP account for them. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> I'm more on the fence on this one. The mentors job does not stop |
| 27 |
> when recruitments completes. The mentor is still required to keep a |
| 28 |
> weather eye on progress for another six months. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> How does the post recruitment mentoring happen with no mentor? |
| 31 |
> I can see how it works with the subjects in RFQ 1 ... they have |
| 32 |
> been mentored since they obtained their trusted status but what |
| 33 |
> about others? |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Mentor is _required_ to monitor their mentee _one_ month after |
| 37 |
recruitment. But I think I get what you mean, there's not that intimate |
| 38 |
relationship anymore. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Even now at least me and gokturk have a habit of giving some general |
| 41 |
feedback to the new recruit after one month, which requires checking |
| 42 |
what they've done during that time. But really, #gentoo-dev in general |
| 43 |
is very helpful and I got to give credit to sam who always seems to be |
| 44 |
the first one on spot when a new recruit is having some questions. I |
| 45 |
guess in a way we'd be sharing the "mentoring load" between multiple |
| 46 |
people instead of focusing one one giving all support. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
And again, we wouldn't recruit "just anyone" with this method, but the |
| 49 |
people who've proven they got it. I'm not too worried about this. But |
| 50 |
remember people, there's no shame in asking before doing something |
| 51 |
potentially breaking! |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
-- juippis |
Archives