From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-40564-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1Nyr2f-0007rr-Bg
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 18:28:57 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 50426E0ACF;
Mon, 5 Apr 2010 18:28:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99480E0AB7
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 18:28:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E7A1B4085
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 18:28:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.602,
BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id kU9zUiPVE0Sj for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>;
Mon, 5 Apr 2010 18:28:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ew0-f214.google.com (mail-ew0-f214.google.com [209.85.219.214])
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E0091B4048
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 18:28:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ewy6 with SMTP id 6so156931ewy.12
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 11:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to
:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:received:message-id:subject
:from:to:content-type;
bh=hLZY8HNNHAbvGD+pqaq3q91HlTDRMMRieYdc3ZCK3M0=;
b=k5UzzOlrKRBUhiHuW6KaC902yLwn8mk/A972GriHfqqK3PUFttNM3HHBi55NlvSO/A
VJi52+uXo2MkGZSWXxAdEE23ni6/QfTUQosZV6OdmpZT4Mlu/BI1AHWqS+u33fVNp8b+
UdOA6ufJ0vlO06OXvY6K4ApxO8H+sFt2KyczI=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
b=KdMv24es4br/yZrmnP8VCukXG21AZawA+VmOg6VtKNbB8aKkdUWEI1hB13TX0vgzW0
NuFV3/WbBpeoyeYTqRh3ABTrfrLSPQ1nhM/4VKADkvvTrqnTVv10LtS3h0d6meB3TcXv
DsjgiMSQ9Fk0BSK90qwYQH+WS9z+c8ApR0/Iw=
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
Sender: denis.dupeyron@gmail.com
Received: by 10.213.108.71 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 11:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20100405175731.GA25573@eris.oppresses.us>
References: <4BB93E00.3070301@gentoo.org> <4BB97A39.20500@caf.com.tr>
<20100405160701.GA15345@eris.oppresses.us> <4BBA14E9.20204@gmail.com>
<20100405175731.GA25573@eris.oppresses.us>
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 12:28:26 -0600
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1c01fd9a6cba1d65
Received: by 10.213.40.201 with SMTP id l9mr796125ebe.28.1270492106491; Mon,
05 Apr 2010 11:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <u2q7c612fc61004051128g19c2e52czc09be996be07dbfa@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [Gentoo Phoenix] recruitment process
From: Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: 844b86a2-694c-4df7-8814-2715a529fb09
X-Archives-Hash: 7b057286759272662b525c4bbf6e5665
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Jon Portnoy <avenj@eris.oppresses.us> wrote:
> Which is all well and good -- the "you wrote some ebuilds so here's
> your commit privs and @gentoo.org" approach to recruitment worked great
> when Gentoo had a few dozen developers.
>
> Today QA is a bit more important, and development is often rather more
> complex than "new version, bump the ebuild" -- it's important that new
> developers have a firm understanding of ebuild complexities.
That's a very important point. On one side there are developers and
would-be developers who want an easier way to recruit people. Most
ideas revolve around lowering the technical/social barriers. On the
other side there's QA and a bunch of other developers who want fewer
people screwing up the tree. Those are proponents of being stricter
during the recruiting process (i.e. in the end recruiting fewer
people) and firing more devs.
None of them though help the poor guys in the middle. Those are the
recruiters who could swing completely one way or the other for
simplicity, or be more subtle and try and make the best out of the
situation and resources.
When you're all done barking, and in case you really consider helping
here are two things you can do:
- join the recruiters
- actually *mentor* people to become developers. And by that I don't
mean passing them your quiz answers, but really training them and
preparing them to become good and well behaved developers. When people
ask me how to go about that my usual answer is do as you were teaching
your son/little brother how to fly fish (or replace fly fishing with
what you do best). Start from the start, progress from there, don't
overlook any aspect of the art (there's more to being a dev than
writing ebuilds), and be ready to spend hours explaining and
re-explaining. If your recruit doesn't get it then it can only be your
fault, so try harder.
Before you replace/change a system you should first try and make it work.
> II don't even like resurfacing to post to -dev.
> Just here to offer some insight on why we originally kept the quiz system.
Hi Jon, long time no see. Thanks for doing that.
Denis.