On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 19:53 -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote: > >>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?
You're somehow implying that being an AT is not as good as being a dev. My understanding is that this GLEP is supposed to make AT as good as being a dev, but with a different role, one that doesn't need commit access. If the people involved decide they want to become committing devs, it also make it easier to make that transition. If they don't want to commit, they can stay as an AT. > 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. I agree. What the AT program has done for amd64, tho, is give us a base of users that have known skills (they were recruited and passed the ebuild quiz) and have a known process they follow for testing and marking bugs, so that the devs have a much easier time staying on top of keywording issues. We've basically said that we trust the ATs to know how to test a package, and we'll take their word for it that it works. It's been very useful for us, and we think it will be useful for others. Daniel (former AT) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
