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 |
> |