Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: gentoo-project <gentoo-project@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] pre-GLEP: Gentoo Developer status
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 01:33:56
Message-Id: CAAr7Pr_xTO4tp+YdydLTAw1pa2bREtNROXQUVNxrUw=uCWfBEA@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] pre-GLEP: Gentoo Developer status by "Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike)"
1 On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) <
2 klondike@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > Hi Michał,
5 >
6 > Taking into account that the letter and not the spirit of GLEP 39 is
7 > usually thrown around as a weapon ("INFORMATIVE", HAH!). I strongly
8 > disrecommend having more "informative" policies.
9 >
10
11 > Not to say that whether you like it or not, not all non ebuild related
12 > developer work is necessarily tied to a project. Even GLEP 39 mentions
13 > this: "Not everything (or everyone) needs a project."
14 >
15
16 I think this is a gap in the GLEP wording. It claims a developer must
17 contribute either in a repo or to some project.
18
19 However undertakers don't retire people who respond to Gentoo mail,
20 regardless of active project affiliation. This seems to
21 leave a gap where people are not contributing to Gentoo in repos or in an
22 active project, but are also not retired.
23
24 Note that there is also no significant procedure for making a 'project'. So
25 if I was about to be retired I could just make a new project, elect myself
26 lead and then claim I was an active contributor and there is no policy
27 against this. I tend to think the undertakers realize this and that is how
28 we ended up with the current retirement policy (with the gap.)
29
30
31 > As a closing note, I'm really getting tired of all this "Either you
32 > write ebuilds or you are a piece of shit" philosophy that is running on
33 > the ambient nowadays. If such people want a developer centric source
34 > based distro, who gives shit about the non developers I strongly
35 > recommend trying Exherbo instead.
36
37
38
39
40 > Klondike
41 >
42 >
43 > El 13/04/18 a las 19:31, Michał Górny escribió:
44 > > Hi,
45 > >
46 > > Here's a quick pre-GLEP for review. It's a supplement to GLEP 39 that
47 > > defines who Gentoo Developer is (GLEP 39 mentions devs a lot but doesn't
48 > > say who they are). Alike 39, it's purely information -- it doesn't
49 > > state a policy, just notes the status quo. It is also minimal
50 > > and focuses on linking the policies of relevant teams.
51 > >
52 > > Please review.
53 > >
54 > > ---
55 > > GLEP: 76
56 > > Title: Gentoo Developer status
57 > > Author: Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o>
58 > > Type: Informational
59 > > Status: Draft
60 > > Version: 1
61 > > Created: 2018-04-11
62 > > Last-Modified: 2018-04-13
63 > > Post-History:
64 > > Content-Type: text/x-rst
65 > > Requires: 39
66 > > Replaces:
67 > > ---
68 > >
69 > > Abstract
70 > > ========
71 > >
72 > > This GLEP aims to supplement GLEP 39 [#GLEP39]_ with the definition
73 > > of *Gentoo Developer*. It shortly indicates the policies relevant
74 > > to obtaining, preserving and revoking the Developer status.
75 > >
76 > >
77 > > Motivation
78 > > ==========
79 > >
80 > > Most of Gentoo's metastructure is explained in GLEP 39 [#GLEP39]_.
81 > > However, while this GLEP is focused around Gentoo Developers, it does
82 > > not define whom they precisely are. It lacks a clear statement of how
83 > > new developers are recruited, and for how long they hold the developer
84 > > status.
85 > >
86 > > The ‘status quo’ can be found across different Gentoo websites.
87 > > The recruitment procedure (from user perspective) is described
88 > > on the main site [#BECOME-A-DEV]_. The Recruiters [#RECRUITERS]_,
89 > > Undertakers [#UNDERTAKERS]_ and Community Relation [#COMREL]_ teams
90 > > provide their relevant policies. However, there seems to be no single
91 > > document binding all of them together. This GLEP aims to be precisely
92 > > that.
93 > >
94 > >
95 > > Specification
96 > > =============
97 > >
98 > > A *Gentoo Developer* is a person who has successfully passed
99 > > the recruitment procedure (as defined at the time of his/her joining)
100 > > and is actively contributing to Gentoo Linux in one or both
101 > > of the following areas:
102 > >
103 > > 1. Gentoo ebuild maintenance (either individual or through a project);
104 > > with activity being determined through the official Gentoo repository
105 > > commits.
106 > >
107 > > 2. Contributing to the present Gentoo projects [#PROJECTS]_; with
108 > > activity being determined at the discretion of project leads.
109 > >
110 > > The admission of new Developers is done by the *Recruiters* project
111 > > [#RECRUITERS]_ upon asserting that the candidate has the necessary
112 > > skills and motivation to actively contribute to Gentoo as outlined
113 > > above, provided recent contributions to the specified areas. The exact
114 > > policies and procedures are specified by the Recruiters project.
115 > >
116 > > The removal of Developers is done by the *Undertakers* project
117 > > [#UNDERTAKERS]_. The Developer status can be revoked in one
118 > > of the following conditions:
119 > >
120 > > - on an explicit request from the Developer himself/herself,
121 > >
122 > > - upon determining that the Developer is no longer actively contributing
123 > > to Gentoo,
124 > >
125 > > - as a result of disciplinary action taken by the *Community Relations*
126 > > project [#COMREL]_ or another explicitly authorized entity.
127 > >
128 > > The exact policies and procedures are specified by the Undertakers
129 > > project.
130 > >
131 > >
132 > > Rationale
133 > > =========
134 > >
135 > > This GLEP does not introduce any new policies but merely attempts to
136 > > document the current standing practices. It aims to supplement GLEP 39
137 > > [#GLEP39]_ with the details necessary to understand who Gentoo
138 > > Developers are, in context of the metastructure defined there.
139 > > It does not mean to replace or thoroughly copy the relevant policies.
140 > >
141 > > Only the details deemed most important and relevant are listed:
142 > > explanation whom Gentoo Developers are, what are their responsibilities,
143 > > what are the requirements for recruiting them and the possibilities of
144 > > their retirement. The teams responsible for handling both of those
145 > > processes and defining the detailed policies are explicitly indicated.
146 > >
147 > > The specific policy details were intentionally left out to avoid having
148 > > to perform frequent updates to this GLEP. This includes the exact
149 > > procedures, ``repo/gentoo`` commit access, devaway system, etc.
150 > >
151 > >
152 > > References
153 > > ==========
154 > >
155 > > .. [#GLEP39] GLEP 39: An "old-school" metastructure proposal with "boot
156 > > for being a slacker"
157 > > (https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0039.html)
158 > >
159 > > .. [#BECOME-A-DEV] Become a developer - Gentoo Linux
160 > > (https://www.gentoo.org/get-involved/become-developer/)
161 > >
162 > > .. [#RECRUITERS] Project:Recruiters - Gentoo Wiki
163 > > (https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Recruiters)
164 > >
165 > > .. [#UNDERTAKERS] Project:Undertakers - Gentoo Wiki
166 > > (https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Undertakers)
167 > >
168 > > .. [#COMREL] Project:ComRel - Gentoo Wiki
169 > > (https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:ComRel)
170 > >
171 > > .. [#PROJECTS] Project:Gentoo - Gentoo Wiki
172 > > (https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Gentoo)
173 > >
174 > >
175 > > Copyright
176 > > =========
177 > > This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
178 > > 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit
179 > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/.
180 > >
181 >
182 >
183 >