Let me clarify here. I'm not concerned about ATs having more privileges
at all. I just want to know why if we're making them full developers
for all intents and purposes, we don't go the extra step and get them
commit access after a probationary period? It seems like this is
supposed to be the end goal anyway. Basically, I feel like this GLEP
goes outside the bounds of what I think of when somebody mentions the
arch testers. Maybe it's just me though.
-Steve
For once agreeing with Ciaran, the less people who aren't seasoned
developers with commit access the better? Some don't want commit
access, most of them really don't need it. Those that want it can ask
for it and take any requisite quizzes.
You also have misunderstood my point. I've always been under the
impression that ATs are regarded highly enough that they could easily
become members of the dev team. With that in mind, *if* we are going to
give them nearly every privilege an arch dev has anyway, why not go one
step further and just make them an official arch dev and avoid
unnecessary bloating of categories with respect to Gentoo dev-team
membership? They don't even need commit access if they don't want it.
We currently have developers without tree access already in any case.
Should we reclassify those folks as well?
Besides, if you want to get technical, our entire userbase are arch
testers to some extent. They run Gentoo, report bugs, unmask packages
locally, submit keywording requests to bugzilla, etc. The good users
make Gentoo a good distribution by providing feedback on bugzilla. The
very best of these folks are typically tapped for membership in arch teams.
-Steve
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
