Sven Vermeulen wrote:
On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 09:09:29PM -0400, Luis F. Araujo wrote:
What is the problem of giving them @g.o addresses?
Why exactly do we need the distinction? (sorry, i can't see any benefit
but more confusion).
The GLEP was originally created to help the architecture testers with a
specific privilege: read-only CVS access. This would allow them to improve
the quality of the ebuilds sooner, help the architecture teams identify
working (and perhaps even more important, not-working) tools and perform
tests on the global system to make sure the distribution is in top-notch
shape.
Read-only CVS would make my life easier, as others have said it would
let me keep up to date without risking being banned for rsyncing every
30 minutes.
The e-mail address was not that important, but was decided to bring it in
"the package" because it would be some sort of appreciation to those users.
I agree, the email address is certainly not necessary, but as a couple
of devs have mentioned before, it might make identifying arch testers in
b.g.o easier. I don't know what the implementation details would be, but
maybe making a flag for arch testers in bugzilla could serve that
purpose as well.
One general idea was that arch testers wouldn't be developers because they
have no formal obligation to the Gentoo project: we don't expect them to put
in x hours a week in Gentoo, read the gentoo-core and -dev mailinglists or
even catch up with most of the events that happen in Gentoo (like GLEPs and
such). This is also a request from the arch testers, because many of them
*can't* devote much time to Gentoo anyway.
I don't and can't read -core, but I do keep an eye on -dev. I try to put
what time I can into testing, but realistically I don't have huge
volumes of free time, though I am hoping to eventually be a full dev.
PS I would be quite surprised if there is *one* arch tester who feels good
with this entire thread; it doesn't show of much appreciation between
people. There is a huge difference between saying that a group has "made
an unfortunate decision" or "did not grasp the essence of the proposal
and situation needed to make a good decision", and "abuse of powers".
PPS
This thread has had a disturbing amount of bickering, and there appears
to be a bit of a sentiment that arch testers don't contribute anything
more than a normal user. I have filed and commented on more bugs in the
week since I became an arch tester than I had total in the 3 years I
have been using Gentoo before that.
The email addresses are also a side point of this whole discussion, it
won't make testing anywhere near as much easier as ro CVS access would.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
