Corey Shields posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Fri, 18 Nov 2005 20:18:24 -0800:
> On Friday 18 November 2005 08:02 pm, George Prowse wrote: >> Of course, by being restrictive to the people who wish to help long-term >> that is the greatest benefit to gentoo. If the @g.o email addresses are a >> problem then the subdomain @staff.g.o has been suggested. The staff >> subdomain would contain almost all relevant other domains. If in the >> unlikely event that somone proposes a subdomain to gentoo that couldn't be >> considered 'staff' or 'developer' then that can be considered at a later >> date. > > I would consider such a silly proposal as the staff.gentoo.org subdomain > addresses as "unlikely", so I'm just trying to think ahead.. OK, just picking the end of a random stair-step to tack on my viewpoint and a bit of a summary from that viewpoint. 1) From what I've read, the idea of "staff" is a settled question. Infra and other "staff" have @gentoo.org addresses and that's not up for debate. It will continue to be that way. 2) The debate at the first council meeting reflected some concern about AT/HTs getting "normal" @gentoo.org addresses, because a level of commitment and discernment hasn't yet been fully proven. 3) That was resolved with the subdomain idea, which has now passed the council (regardless of the circumstances and nil chance of something similar happening again). 4) The problem is that the subdomain hasn't been specified, as there wasn't really time to hash that out, so now we are doing that. Note, however, that the decision that it /will/ be a subdomain has already been made (unless someone's demanding that it be revoked, and I don't read the discussion as getting to that point, yet). 5) Whatever the issue with staff vs. developers, that's a different, and as mentioned in (1) basically settled issue, for better or for worse. The idea here is that AT/HTs aren't even at the level of regular "staff", so again, it's a different issue. 6) What AT/HTs are, as someone mentioned, are "gold star" users, if we want to call them that. They are recognized as being quite useful to the arch/herd, and as potential devs sometime in the future, should they wish to pursue it and things work out, but there's a hesitance to give them the full blessing yet, because they haven't proven themselves yet (and regardless, some don't want it yet, or possibly ever). 7) Of course, "gold star" seems a bit childish, which I get the feeling was the reason it was chosen, to drive home the viewpoint of the poster that the whole idea IS childish. (Never-the-less, there's perhaps an "adult" version of the same thing, see my proposal below.) 8) Infra has expressed reluctance, and asks the question if we accept this one, where might it end? Legitimate question, but AFAICT, the question is no longer whether this is a good idea or not as it's already been decided to go ahead, but rather one of implementation, once the subdomain is settled upon. Now my thoughts, as one intending to become an AT at some point and maybe, over an extended period, become a dev. (Yes, I'm sure Homer's getting impatient with me, but what can I say, but my style is slow and steady, but I'm not about to go elsewhere, either, so...) a) I don't care one way or the other about a Gentoo address. As someone else said, I've got enough addresses already. However, from what I've read into the various discussions, the one's pushing for this, as the ones pushing AT in the first place, have found that a gentoo.org label could at times lessen the confusion. The subdomain would clarify things both from the not-developer side, and from the recognized tester side, allowing new ATs and devs to track the status on sight, with easy verification if necessary. Thus, from my viewpoint, as received, this would seem to be a convenience for the devs (including "staff") as much as for the AT/HTs. b) With particularly points (3), (6) and (8) in mind, viewed thru the filter of (7), it would appear to me that the best solution at this point would be something denoting "junior" status, clearly lower than /either/ "staff" or "devs", as AT/HTs haven't yet proved themselves, something that both staff and devs arguably have already done. At the same time, it needs to be generic enough to be reused for other potential "junior" cases in the future, thereby limiting the damage, from infra's perspective, to the two domains (since the council already decided a subdomain was necessary, just not which one, so it's really too late to argue that, unless someone wants to do another GLEP recinding this one, with all the politics /that/ would mean, just not a good idea IMO). c) That lays out the requirements (and discussion to this point) as I see them (and it). Assuming I'm viewing things correctly, then, the question now becomes "What term clearly denotes junior status, without sounding childish?" Put another way, "What's the generally accepted "adult" term for student or trainee or junior member or "gold star earner"? d) The best answer I can come up with is "intern", therefore, "@intern.gentoo.org" (or @internee.gentoo.org, or...). AFAIK, that's non-demeaning, yet clearly denotes the position as a one expected to do a /lot/ of work, but still under serious supervision and without the authority to make any heavy decisions without going thru someone else first. This proposal is of course recognizing that I might at some point have such and address myself... I'd be comfortable with it -- actually more so that with a full gentoo address, until such time (if ever) that I become a full dev, of course. Thoughts? Strong disagreements? Agreement? Points I overlooked? A better suggestion? Go to it! -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
