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 4.54) id 1FMa8s-0004eG-EO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:27:02 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.5) with SMTP id k2O0PhI1023665; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:25:43 GMT Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.224] (may be forged)) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k2O0Ln7s023485 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:21:49 GMT Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i24so624562wra for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:21:48 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=mwW1Xtqf707DySyWPLVTJeFxgupvuB0/X+jJx8TllmJuHGzZl9G57th9FEYFMI9cSFfGUpsKSCEVa/j8kCkwbIrXVqlEUApYBU3bcZj0e7XbbZMc7JH3Oj6P99dCIt0CKXyZ3WZewexH/p+9c4u9OypIBagQHyPmK/ugIx/E8Qk= Received: by 10.35.77.18 with SMTP id e18mr148973pyl; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:21:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.35.107.17 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:21:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 01:21:48 +0100 From: "Stefan Schweizer" Sender: sschweizer@gmail.com To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Sandboxes In-Reply-To: <44233322.2040801@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline References: <44233322.2040801@gentoo.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by robin.gentoo.org id k2O0Ln7s023485 X-Archives-Salt: 76795511-08be-45d9-850c-18b0d4c5a676 X-Archives-Hash: 086c19e7bed7acde0b9f3c8c7c4605a1 On 3/24/06, Alec Warner wrote: > Thoughts on ideas on this somewhat more focussed idea? ( or at least I > think it's more focused :P ) IMO motivation b) is not taken into account enough. You are missing out a general-user-overlay, where the developer adding a user to the access list would be responsible for him. We really need a general user overlay for stuff that is abandoned in the treee (maintainer-needed@gentoo.org) or stuff that has not even been added to the tree (maintainer-wanted@gentoo.org). Those are ebuilds that no developer is interested in, so a general way for users needs to be present to be able to take care of those in a policy-based-overlay instead of bugzilla. Also the overlay will be easier to access and more bug-free as every person who is trusted by gentoo-devs can just fix bugs that come up without spamming every CC: on the list as it would be in bugzilla. Regards, Stefan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list