Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2019-07-21
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 19:56:33
Message-Id: 1840792.kWEk0IjtYx@pinacolada
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2019-07-21 by "Michał Górny"
1 Am Montag, 8. Juli 2019, 07:36:03 CEST schrieb Michał Górny:
2 > On Mon, 2019-07-08 at 06:43 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
3 > > > > > > > On Sun, 07 Jul 2019, Michał Górny wrote:
4 > > > My second agenda item is: removing posting restrictions from gentoo-dev
5 > > > mailing list.
6 >
7 > As for the attacks, I believe having active Proctors team is
8 > the
9 > solution. After all, they provide more proactive approach
10 > and better
11 > response times than ComRel used to.
12
13 ^ This. (That was the precise intention behind re-forming proctors.)
14 So now that we have the proctors we can give things a try again.
15 Attacks and hostile environment were the most critical part.
16
17 > As for the off-topics, I don't think we really solved it. After all:
18 >
19 > a. some of the problematic traffic has shifted to -project or other
20 > mailing lists,
21 > b. frequently *developers* are the source of the problem.
22
23 Shrug. Off-topic is not so critical. ["Mark all read."] Also, if we manage to
24 keep the -dev list at least "off-topic but technical", that's nearly "on-
25 topic" again.
26
27 > The third problem mentioned is a minor one and I think we can live with
28 > it.
29
30 If a "support request" is technically challenging and interesting, why not.
31 After all, we might learn something from it and improve Gentoo as a result.
32 Also, it *is* interesting to learn what people are using Gentoo for. So this
33 is something I can live with too.
34
35 > I would also like to remind that the initial proposal made sense because
36 > it restricted both -dev and -project, so the split between mailing lists
37 > was preserved. The decision to restrict one but not the other has
38 > resulted in switching the split to 'devs only' and 'everyone', without
39 > matching change of rules.
40
41 Yes, and that specific decision was rather idi^H^H^H... never mind.
42 It was a horrible meeting.
43
44 --
45 Andreas K. Hüttel
46 dilfridge@g.o
47 Gentoo Linux developer
48 (council, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2019-07-21 Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o>