From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-83349-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EBC8138330
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 01:09:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CA66FE0BF0;
Wed, 10 Jan 2018 01:09:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83BE5E0AED
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 01:09:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-io0-f178.google.com (mail-io0-f178.google.com [209.85.223.178])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
(Authenticated sender: mattst88)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 734B4335C37
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 01:09:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-io0-f178.google.com with SMTP id d11so341308iog.5
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 09 Jan 2018 17:09:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytdgGk5Upefrdb1vPFfVP3/hx/kds2e53F38Y/InqIzFVwGoR+2Q
/tiA+xGsctKKAmC+Clp+GkAIKGcO9+m5sMVmqKE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotEiz5nps5/suRzngvNbLdKeLGw4lkit2wi4tqVB0HdzNCdPJUA7HWGYsd7JC3ElDZko2kD8r7JmNc/B2G0Zno=
X-Received: by 10.107.183.11 with SMTP id h11mr17186560iof.187.1515546556688;
Tue, 09 Jan 2018 17:09:16 -0800 (PST)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.2.180.80 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 17:08:56 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1685019.DAF74n7IXa@pinacolada>
References: <1685019.DAF74n7IXa@pinacolada>
From: Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 17:08:56 -0800
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAEdQ38FHD2F0AMULNUcBhtGhO-sD+zWffEsw3MJDJZOou4E_fQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEdQ38FHD2F0AMULNUcBhtGhO-sD+zWffEsw3MJDJZOou4E_fQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev
mailing list
To: gentoo development <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Archives-Salt: 880b377f-d080-46cd-ad9d-46e6fb9f5275
X-Archives-Hash: 5620be6454a26c9f8e556d149b1168f4
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:
> During the last Gentoo council meeting, the decision was made to implement
> changes to the gentoo-dev mailing list [1].
>
> These changes affect only the gentoo-dev mailing list, and will come into
> effect on 23 January 2018.
>
> * Subscribing to the list and receiving list mail remains as it is now.
> * Posting to the list will only be possible to Gentoo developers and
> whitelisted additional participants.
> * Whitelisting requires that one developer vouches for you. We intend this
> to be as unbureaucratic as possible.
> * Obviously, repeated off-topic posting as well as behaviour against the
> Code of Conduct [2] will lead to revocation of the posting permission.
>
> If, as a non-developer, you want to participate in a discussion on
> gentoo-dev,
> - either reply directly to the author of a list mail and ask him/her to
> forward your message,
> - or ask any Gentoo developer of your choice to get you whitelisted.
>
> If, as a developer, you want to have someone whitelisted, please comment on
> bug 644070 [3]. Similar to Bugzilla editbugs permission, if you are vouching
> for a contributor you are expected to keep an eye on their activity.
It seems like the obvious way this fails is some Gentoo developer acks
one of the problem people. I don't think that's particularly unlikely.
Then what do we do?