Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain

[Ben Skeggs <darktama@iinet.net.au>]

On Sat, 2005-11-19 at 20:48 +0100, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> I've said it in the first meeting and I'll reiterate: what is the sentiment
> of the arch testers in this case (if they are still reading this thread)?
> 
I'm not sure that this topic is worthy of a flame-fest, but anyway..
still reading. :)

I don't believe @g.o (or @whatever.g.o) address is *necessary*, but it
would be of great help to know whether or not a bugzilla entry or
comment is from an AT.  It helps to know whether or not I should bother
doing "official" testing for a package, there's not much point if
another AT has already done thorough testing and my time would be
better spent putting another package through it's paces.

Whether or not the final address is @g.o or @at.g.o or whatever
shouldn't even be a huge issue.  If @at.g.o is too much work for the
admins (ie.  when an AT becomes a dev), then @g.o should just be used
instead.  Why is this such a big issue?

Anyway, the most important reason for the GLEP (IMO) is giving AT's r/o
access to CVS.  When working on bugs, it's always fun to find out that
the problem has already been resolved and just hasn't made it to your
local rsync mirror yet..

Just my $0.02.
Ben.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list