From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27097 invoked by uid 1002); 22 Apr 2003 18:00:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 25189 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2003 18:00:29 -0000 From: Klavs Klavsen To: Mark Bainter Cc: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20030422175556.GM2114@firinn.org> References: <1050997108.2986.28.camel@amd.vsen.dk> <1051016369.4102.46.camel@entropy> <200304221726.35741.danarmak@gentoo.org> <200304221557.42803.aoyu93@dsl.pipex.com> <1051027209.2986.81.camel@amd.vsen.dk> <20030422165933.GB7131@cerberus.oppresses.us> <20030422175556.GM2114@firinn.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-MEDoQ/yoao32jPWtUhEq" Organization: Enable IT Message-Id: <1051034412.3002.85.camel@amd.vsen.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.3- Date: 22 Apr 2003 20:00:12 +0200 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuilds not getting in :( X-Archives-Salt: 66428453-27c5-43b5-a5f2-3744f9072a75 X-Archives-Hash: f74c164add0401c366cb67b05f3ccdc8 --=-MEDoQ/yoao32jPWtUhEq Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 19:55, Mark Bainter wrote: > Jon Portnoy [avenj@gentoo.org] wrote: > > The problem is that we can't just give everyone who submits an ebuild o= r=20 > > two commit access. > >=20 > > We are, however, stepping up recruiting somewhat with a recruiting emai= l=20 > > address. There are also ideas floating around for ways to make it easie= r=20 > > for users to get ebuilds into the tree quicker. >=20 > I don't disagree with this. You might consider letting them still be a > maintainer though, and just have people who are new maintainers pass=20 > their changes through a more seasoned member of the community until they > have a few releases under their belt, or whatever criteria the devs think > demonstrates the level of trust necessary to give them commit access to > their ebuilds. See this sounds like a good idea. I ofcourse don't want the current maintainer to feel dumped because someone else makes an ebuild for the newest version of a program. Perhaps something like a Primary - and secondary ebuild maintainers could be established? --=20 Regards, Klavs Klavsen, GSEC - kl@vsen.dk - http://www.vsen.dk Working with Unix is like wrestling a worthy opponent.=20 Working with windows is like attacking a small whining child=20 who is carrying a .38. =09 --=-MEDoQ/yoao32jPWtUhEq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA+pYMsPToLeX4GPGIRAuS/AKCVf0bWFvMrSfodvLIvIoFc0+Rm/ACeNgIL o3GXQEdsmiQwQW5hQdNrQtk= =ILH2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-MEDoQ/yoao32jPWtUhEq--