Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 41: Making Arch Testers official Gentoo Staff

["Stephen P. Becker" <geoman@gentoo.org>]

>>Let me clarify here.  I'm not concerned about ATs having more privileges
>>at all.  I just want to know why if we're making them full developers
>>for all intents and purposes, we don't go the extra step and get them
>>commit access after a probationary period?  It seems like this is
>>supposed to be the end goal anyway.  Basically, I feel like this GLEP
>>goes outside the bounds of what I think of when somebody mentions the
>>arch testers.  Maybe it's just me though.
>>
>>-Steve
> 
> 
> For once agreeing with Ciaran, the less people who aren't seasoned
> developers with commit access the better?  Some don't want commit
> access, most of them really don't need it.  Those that want it can ask
> for it and take any requisite quizzes.

You also have misunderstood my point.  I've always been under the 
impression that ATs are regarded highly enough that they could easily 
become members of the dev team.  With that in mind, *if* we are going to 
give them nearly every privilege an arch dev has anyway, why not go one 
step further and just make them an official arch dev and avoid 
unnecessary bloating of categories with respect to Gentoo dev-team 
membership?  They don't even need commit access if they don't want it. 
We currently have developers without tree access already in any case. 
Should we reclassify those folks as well?

Besides, if you want to get technical, our entire userbase are arch 
testers to some extent.  They run Gentoo, report bugs, unmask packages 
locally, submit keywording requests to bugzilla, etc.  The good users 
make Gentoo a good distribution by providing feedback on bugzilla.  The 
very best of these folks are typically tapped for membership in arch teams.

-Steve
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list