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 1EdXb7-000374-Gu for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:38:01 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAJIbGe1007749; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:37:16 GMT Received: from buggy.blubb.ch (range21-65.shlink.ch [217.148.7.65]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAJIYn58020947 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:34:49 GMT Received: from aqua ([192.168.10.5]) by buggy.blubb.ch with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EdXRZ-0007Ua-NS for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:28:09 +0100 Message-ID: <437F704B.9040809@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:34:51 +0100 From: Simon Stelling <blubb@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] implementation details for GLEP 41 References: <20051119170615.GW12982@mail.lieber.org> <437F6795.7000307@gentoo.org> <20051119181544.GX12982@mail.lieber.org> In-Reply-To: <20051119181544.GX12982@mail.lieber.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 2711cd72-a4b0-4e41-a826-96389a721c68 X-Archives-Hash: b7ef609a5ef5dc7dd0008e43fb16cffb Kurt Lieber wrote: > Because, in practice, this doesn't happen. Accounts (or, in this case, > email addresses) stay around until someone gets enough of a bee under their > bonnet to do somethig about it. Since there's no pain or cost for the > AT/HT project lead, there's no reason for them to be vigilant about > tracking activity. Plus, assuming we have a large number of these testers, > how are people going to know whether or not one specific arch tester is > active? That's not an acceptable solution. Uhm, does that implicitly mean there is such a tracking method for devs (where dev = dev/staff/whatever)? There are devs who don't have commit permissions to any cvs repo, how is their activity tracked? In the AT case it wouldn't be so hard to check their activity. !seen on IRC and a bugzilla query printing out bugs where they made a comment should be enough, IMHO. -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead blubb@gentoo.org -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list