From: Joshua Saddler <nightmorph@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-doc@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-doc] [RFC] GDP policy updates
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 16:26:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130321162629.0dfc4559@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130320171301.GA2851@gentoo.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2009 bytes --]
On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:13:01 +0000
Sven Vermeulen <swift@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I'd like to suggest a few changes on our GDP policy, namely:
>
> - updating the license comment if you use a different license should be
> mandatory (hence switch from "should" to "must")
approved.
> - drop using metadoc.xml for registering long outstanding bugs
approved. i'd forgotten that was even setup that way. we haven't used it like that in years.
> - have project lead (or delegated person) "decide" on the recruitment
> process / progress
approved. especially since i'm away quite a bit these days with health issues -- i read everything sent in to bugzie and the lists, but am unable to do much activity-wise. more than one designated contact, and a streamlined recruitment, is a good idea.
(i volunteer you, if you're willing. :) )
> - drop mandatory gdp quiz, make it recommended
approved, tentatively. we need to be careful going forward to make sure that folks at least know the basics of GDP so they don't break the tree (and/or their translations). the point of the quiz is to make sure that everyone is "on the same page" so that we don't have wildly different code styles, broken code, or lacking knowledge on how to do "stuff."
we can keep an eye on potential new recruits without the up-front strict requirements; make sure they know what they're doing. we do already have guidelines in place for translations for example, where we do as-is or reject-all for proxy commits, so...this new way of doing it could fit right in. though a revised quiz might not be a bad idea.
as it is, i've caught a lot of errors on every quiz i've reviewed, so it is good that folks get their misconceptions corrected early in the process, so they spend more time writing good code, and less re-writing bad.
thanks again for your extensive review and suggestions, sven! (and for inadvertently giving me a needed kick-in-the-pants.) i'm in favor of making all these changes happen.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-21 23:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-20 17:13 [gentoo-doc] [RFC] GDP policy updates Sven Vermeulen
2013-03-20 18:17 ` Tobias Heinlein
2013-03-21 18:13 ` Chema Alonso
2013-03-21 23:26 ` Joshua Saddler [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130321162629.0dfc4559@gentoo.org \
--to=nightmorph@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-doc@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox