From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EdLh1-00037M-DB for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:55:19 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAJ5rV7M031951; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:53:31 GMT Received: from jaguar.lieber.org (jaguar.lieber.org [217.160.252.168]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAJ5oJCT008992 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:50:19 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jaguar.lieber.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E55BC29D723 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:54:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jaguar.lieber.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (jaguar.lieber.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 02625-04 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:54:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by jaguar.lieber.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 7E0DC29D721; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:54:44 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:54:44 +0000 From: Kurt Lieber To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain Message-ID: <20051119055444.GN12982@mail.lieber.org> References: <1132333748.8524.9.camel@localhost> <20051118173243.GA16034@dmz.brixandersen.dk> <437E4F3E.5070705@gentoo.org> <20051118221428.15ba3adb@snowdrop.home> <437E5965.10502@gentoo.org> <20051118235829.GC12958@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <3610591862.20051119010748@gentoo.org> <437E7B49.7080204@gentoo.org> <20051119053317.GB31452@toucan.gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="wayzTnRSUXKNfBqd" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051119053317.GB31452@toucan.gentoo.org> X-GPG-Key: http://www.lieber.org/kurtl.pub.gpg User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lieber.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-3.3, AWL=0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599] X-Spam-Score: -5.891 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: b29afb5e-167b-4b0e-88be-bc637bf5e5f0 X-Archives-Hash: b72064ae55236797cc48b85f5ead28ef --wayzTnRSUXKNfBqd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 05:33:17AM +0000 or thereabouts, Mike Frysinger wro= te: > On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 09:09:29PM -0400, Luis F. Araujo wrote: > > What is the problem of giving them @g.o addresses? >=20 > read the first meeting where GLEP 41 was covered ... If I'm understanding it correctly, the concern was that by giving folks "real" gentoo.org addresses if they were "only" doing arch testing, there would be no incentive for them to contribute any more than that. Two points to make: * There are a lot of Gentoo devs right now with full gentoo.org addresses who don't do squat for this project, so exactly what bar are we holding these arch testers to? * Anyone who decides to volunteer more of their time to our project *just* so they can have their own shiny gentoo.org address isn't someone I personally want on this project. If they don't have more motivation for doing it than that, they don't belong here. Should staff.gentoo.org ride at the back of the bus? Do we need to set up a separate CVS repository for them so they don't accidentally mix bits with the pure bloods?=20 --kurt --wayzTnRSUXKNfBqd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDfr4kJPpRNiftIEYRAmuaAKCITdbCh4eogrrTxRtGftWvgXr7/QCfcbxF Fxxb3kHTBrOjItXHIs03d0w= =Nb2Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wayzTnRSUXKNfBqd-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list