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 1Edcoh-00042R-2L for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:12:23 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAK0Beo6032211; Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:11:40 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAK09q5P001628 for ; Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:09:52 GMT Received: from cpe-65-26-255-237.wi.res.rr.com ([65.26.255.237] helo=nightcrawler) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EdcmG-0004JV-5X for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:09:52 +0000 Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:09:41 -0600 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain Message-ID: <20051120000940.GG4535@nightcrawler> References: <1132333748.8524.9.camel@localhost> <437F9739.4060501@gentoo.org> <20051119221941.GB4535@nightcrawler> <200511191506.41732.cshields@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="doKZ0ri6bHmN2Q5y" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200511191506.41732.cshields@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: 9bff3695-d866-4fac-83de-8596acf7a3e3 X-Archives-Hash: 0f40a2ccce33c2429d6aa4dcaf16dfde --doKZ0ri6bHmN2Q5y Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 03:06:41PM -0800, Corey Shields wrote: > On Saturday 19 November 2005 02:19 pm, Brian Harring wrote: > > > Minor? What you're asking for will cause a lot of administrative > > > nightmare for infra to manage those subdomain addresses among other > > > things. > > > > Frankly I think you're exagerating here. >=20 > What about the end-user headache of having to change subscriptions/bugzil= la=20 > accounts/aliases/etc. from username@subdomain.gentoo.org to=20 > username@gentoo.org should they turn dev? Same rules that already are forced upon devs when they make the=20 change. It's not really an AT specific issue. Bugzie changes are handled by=20 the devrel monkey who is converting the user over, ml, the user has to=20 do the re-subscribe on their own. If you're after changing that process, hell, that would be nice, but=20 it's a global issue, not AT specific. It's not a blocker for AT's, since it's a global issue. > > It's a crazy notion, but y'all could've commented in the *TWO* months > > that this glep has been percolating, "yo, what do you want from an > > infra standpoint?". >=20 > Yeah, my bad.. Had I known that infrastructure implementation decisions = could=20 > be decided by a GLEP with no infra input requested, I would have paid=20 > attention. >=20 > Besides, when I first read the glep "*TWO* months ago" there was nothing = about=20 > email subdomains.. It was fine.. Therefore, I did not comment. See email in response to lance. Two months is applicable for the cvs=20 requirements... > > I see this mainly as infra/trustees not watching the ML. >=20 > Foundation has nothing to do with this issue whatsoever. Strangely, my mentioning of it is related to my (perhaps crazy?) view=20 that trustees should be watching what's going on with gentoo- the main=20 comment in the email is that at least the changes were known for a=20 month via the managers meeting is where the issue comes in. You=20 *should* be following the council's actions in my opinon. Perhaps my view is flawed/stupid, but y'all are the stewards of=20 gentoo. I expect you guys to be rarely surprised by proposed changes. > > Sucks, but too damn bad. >=20 > So will be finding help from infra to implement this with that attitude. = =20 > You're not helping the situation, Brian.. Kind of took that one out of context- the comment is in regards to=20 waiting till after something occurs to start complaining about it. Subdomain complaints, fine, I'm not even going to argue that one at=20 this point, the actual cvs enabling, you should've known it was=20 coming- being surprised by it sucks, but so does trying to revert it=20 because it surprised you. > I corrected my wrong in this thread,=20 > but I still feel that the lack of delay between the changes and the vote = was=20 > not enough for devs to comment (specifically Lance). I don't care if I a= m a=20 > trustee or not, that's wrong. After your last email, I don't think you a= re=20 > in any position to comment on behaviour. ;) Still stand by the email, surprisingly. Thing is, you haven't corrected 'your wrong', and if you had just=20 *stated* the concern from above, rather then=20 "Lesson learned, make friends with a majority of the council, write=20 and propose a glep the day before a meeting and then push it through. wow. sounds a lot like American politics." I wouldn't be pointing to it as abhorrent behaviour that is cabal=20 fodder. Baseless accusations don't usually result in people liking what you're=20 saying, even if you retracted the "council members voting on stuff they=20 didn't know about" claim. If you can't see that, well I'll shut up on the point (others have already= =20 pointed out it was a bs statement). ~harring --doKZ0ri6bHmN2Q5y Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDf77EvdBxRoA3VU0RAt7fAKDAe07B/spBSwgbE1z6Fe92LZAcnwCZASZb oo4/k89DM+A6S77kU7FJKAU= =vcyD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --doKZ0ri6bHmN2Q5y-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list