Hello, Hilton Chain <hako@ultrarare.space> writes:
> These thoughts began as an attempt to think if there's a possibility to > develop > Guix without committers[1]. I agree with this principle; I think it is a goal for several of us and the motivation for some of the tooling, in particular QA. That is compatible with the “bulk update” kind of contributions, with the understanding that the kind of work is different here (mostly computer-generated) and that review work is by necessity different as well (mostly checking that CI gives a green light.) For the Guix-Science channel we’ve more or less reached the state where every change is automatically tested before it can be pushed, which is a step towards reducing the privileges of committers. (Of course Guix-Science is small and what applies there cannot be directly transposed to Guix, which is a wholly different scale.) > I also find "team members" and "committers" may contain unnecessary > implications, maybe we could define them as: > > Community members that commit to dedicate part of their time in a given > period, to help other community members in the contribution process. I’m not sure what’s different in this definition, but at least I think we should have a “Roles” section in the manual, based on what’s currently under “Commit Access” and “Teams” and probably additional material to give a clear overview of the social structure. I hope this makes sense! Ludo’.
