From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 25FE8138334 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 15:54:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9A734E09BE; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 15:54:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf1-f170.google.com (mail-pf1-f170.google.com [209.85.210.170]) (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 0BAD2E09AD for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 15:54:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f170.google.com with SMTP id p14so57398pfn.4 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 07:54:18 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=33pCtl66eLxK6lcxdsslt9N/P9p90TMiZVeifj13gxM=; b=Ihi7G5qzVquzQM5cKNJqhMk1VWPk6BpKzGx4tqsduPVzxGe+Ov6aehEZMnoU5FCgjK q8+FRWlAI41psHBYYko1L+WJoAdO6JKz1sCDkHjgkGfY+WhtUu500UZR+1I5AbyrjKHq 3XLv5L9BtL2wdWEk+eGoDKW7K+svt9ScMKiEG2qyQaVGSy+x3RVR19nZG3uHp575s21s W9uYGy6e1riCRLhslO6/Yr9wpy5nwmLpIKAMB3UWBuNCktyg6QSDvCWDn4gi5RIj6WPc rGuu0NbKRqQOMJyCKy2/6sw4B5NFmjPtyOGMlr3zbr4Er+K38dUPm12BlYZ0Hqf16FGy Sbyw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXQU0vq+1/kOk3qTuqel8+PhPaMJU4JmoQOonGaftt3OJTbMVkQ qOuOifLjt9/XWfefSSz9bDkYnYC0BbizXN/UqdGeo9dS X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwUEfisX5s0V7aea1xnroDqIyrmriRyBGj0ZQPJWWkLR9qE2vXMGBXGtfVmmCPA3YhrPq7F6Ra7cwZh0wIrdHg= X-Received: by 2002:a63:2cc9:: with SMTP id s192mr24744339pgs.396.1575993257045; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 07:54:17 -0800 (PST) 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <84a435bffe460efd2620ceec0c0405fa18a7937b.camel@gentoo.org> <79c81a90-af55-5661-307d-e4143e99a644@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <79c81a90-af55-5661-307d-e4143e99a644@gentoo.org> From: Rich Freeman Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 10:54:04 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Revisiting GLEP 81 (acct-*) policies (reviews, cross-distro syncing) To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 47747534-636e-427a-be25-0a24a154fbf5 X-Archives-Hash: ddf4fc719d8703a8666d2bcf5857b327 On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 9:50 AM Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > For esoteric packages with a dedicated user, though, you're probably > right. The main benefit of the mailing list posts so far is that they > let me track down pull requests and suggest that people ignore the > example in the devmanual. > Do the list reviews really put people off that much? It seems like eclasses. Plenty of packages have one-off eclasses that nobody cares about except the specific project, in which case the list posts are just a formality and largely a NOOP. However, this list isn't really high-traffic. Ditto with last-rites and so on. I think having the opportunity for review is probably worth it even if often it is just a NOOP. If people are afraid to post something for review because of potential criticism then maybe we need to work more to make sure people understand that everybody makes mistakes and nobody knows everything, and this is why we have reviews in the first place. Nobody is going to have their commit access removed because they didn't notice something and were thoughtful enough to get more eyes on it before commiting it. IMO that is a sign of responsible commit access. -- Rich