From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JWzhR-0007AH-P3 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:54:50 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E37C5E087B; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 19:53:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.239]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2B96E087B for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 19:53:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 76so2294262wra.10 for ; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 11:53:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=3G18N5QUaDe4iwHzYIVNnoYBTm6kymI7CmbrorXzP/0=; b=XJ9sajW72Q0pZpwSnv9BlynxZJfKKUiWRIanSmLzSGJ7atd4y30WJ0GvDxz+bfQunQW1S5yE7E6UfHTbp2xPO1bHuz1u0oQBQl6LbJpdByHRl0Gtkkd7X/D5LwrHUbblZrKUXZL+kSeikqaZV3K/IX0G62rUKiQBQ0RIUABiUjU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=krmqV5VgdD1ddbSP+nAp736wJxdG1lcb+yqNrO6dPChN79MEsGmYbjEXtQEeBvUnRn2FrtbwPERTzL6wxpCegkOCRA+boO8kGpVdU+To5m7UHGF4QckktrQsxKC8LdtbDAx0Rq53pEEQV4wVwWt0OR+7r4N3gj9IbGCYYjWlkW8= Received: by 10.65.254.5 with SMTP id g5mr7351914qbs.62.1204746827173; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 11:53:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from emachine.mpa.com ( [66.19.241.95]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q15sm1321349qbq.0.2008.03.05.11.53.45 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 05 Mar 2008 11:53:46 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Anderson To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for March Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 15:04:50 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <20080301103002.A2AE266A22@smtp.gentoo.org> <200803051324.12812.gentoofan23@gmail.com> <47CEF76C.1010901@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <47CEF76C.1010901@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1392175.4AD6xZVveG"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200803051504.53703.gentoofan23@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 823c1fd9-7119-4552-9b70-bf34c36d0902 X-Archives-Hash: 4791b1d2896f213233675c8d06366a6f --nextPart1392175.4AD6xZVveG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 05 March 2008 14:41:32 Petteri R=E4ty wrote: > Thomas Anderson kirjoitti: > >> Please elaborate on how a "full.fledged developer" would differ from a > >> "package maintainer" technically. What requirements and/or > >> priviledges do you think could be reduced? > >> > >> Marius > > > > Perhaps there could be some honor code system at least, where the packa= ge > > maintainer would be restricted to their area of maintainership. > > This is the current situation. > > Regards, > Petteri Exactly, only the "package maintainers" wouldn't have everything that a ful= l=20 dev would have... --nextPart1392175.4AD6xZVveG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBHzvzlF6yMcaBxwHkRAvLNAKCVs9Rf7LL+EhuLntBdNYkqlE2bSQCfZAvO gfcK3a3M1M8kVQFVDAz9z/U= =P2YC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1392175.4AD6xZVveG-- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list