On 26 December 2012 20:43, Kent Fredric <kentfred...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27 December 2012 05:39, Kent Fredric <kentfred...@gmail.com> wrote: >> It could actually be just the Proxy Maintainer workflow is not clear enough, >> or simple enough, and that we need more push towards a more heavy >> proxy-maintainer based system ( I don't know, I'm ignorant to too much of >> proxy-maintainer-ship stuff, to discern /why/ that is might be difficult, >> but I'd imagine my ignorance is part of the problem ) > > Ok, after a bit of twitter, it seems part of my problem is I am just > more comfortable, at least, in an initial recruitment scenario, > working in a semi-proxy maintainer scenario. > > I like having other people review changes and soforth, and I like > having a layer of protection between me and fuckery, and going from 0 > to "Can cause damage to CVS" is not something I'm fond of. > > And possibly, I can be helpful via the proxy maintainership avenue, > and maybe more traffic going that way could be helpful. > > However, I note a problem of sorts: > > http://www.gentoo.org/ => http://i.imgur.com/o0BqO.png
Saw this thread too late. This is now bug 448710 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=448710 -- Regards, Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2