On Wednesday 05 March 2008 17:11:58 Anant Narayanan wrote:
> If it's not too late for this month's meeting, I'd like to discuss the
> possibility of including a new "post" in our developer base - the
> package maintainer.
>
> a) The requirements to become a package maintainer for Gentoo may be
> le
On 3/5/08, Anant Narayanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 06-Mar-08, at 2:35 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
> >> Arch Testers don't have tree access. This proposal gives the
> >> package maintainer the ability to commit their changes.
> >
> > How would you ensure ebuil
On 06-Mar-08, at 2:35 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
Arch Testers don't have tree access. This proposal gives the
package maintainer the ability to commit their changes.
How would you ensure ebuild quality for these package maintainers?
Maintainers will also go through a
On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:07:37 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote:
> The tasks are minor tasks that don't require a lot of time at hand,
> but gives a good way to judge if the person is in for the experience
> or the money, and might be able to cut the deal even for Gentoo dev
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 04:07:48PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>> Arch Testers don't have tree access. This proposal gives the package
>> maintainer the ability to commit their changes.
> So what you're looking for is committer ACLs. Gentoo's CVS currently does
> not use any form of ACLs to rest
Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 16:05:09 Petteri Räty wrote:
Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
Arch Testers don't have tree access. This proposal gives the package
maintainer the ability to commit their changes.
How would you ensure ebuild quality for these package maintainers?
Anant Narayanan wrote:
> [stuff]
So basically, what you're looking for is something like Arch Linux's
Trusted User (TU) concept[1].
That works for Arch, because they have 5 repositories (including a
community repo), but I'm not sure how well that would fit Gentoo, where
there's just one.
We'd ne
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 16:05:09 Petteri Räty wrote:
> Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
> > Arch Testers don't have tree access. This proposal gives the package
> > maintainer the ability to commit their changes.
>
> How would you ensure ebuild quality for these package maintainers?
>
> Regards,
> Pet
I think it could be useful to learn from other projects' handling of
SoC. The FFmpeg project has a list of "qualification tasks" for the
students to complete before they can accepted into SoC, as you can see
From [1].
The tasks are minor tasks that don't require a lot of time at hand, but
gives a
Thomas Anderson wrote:
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 14:59:55 Doug Goldstein wrote:
Thomas Anderson wrote:
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 14:41:32 Petteri Räty wrote:
Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
Please elaborate on how a "full.fledged developer" would differ from a
"package ma
Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
Arch Testers don't have tree access. This proposal gives the package
maintainer the ability to commit their changes.
How would you ensure ebuild quality for these package maintainers?
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 14:59:55 Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 March 2008 14:41:32 Petteri Räty wrote:
> >> Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
> Please elaborate on how a "full.fledged developer" would differ from a
> "package maintainer" technically. What
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 14:59:55 Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 March 2008 14:41:32 Petteri Räty wrote:
> >> Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
> Please elaborate on how a "full.fledged developer" would differ from a
> "package maintainer" technically. What
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Anant Narayanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some of you may argue that we already have proxy-maintainers. That's a
> great idea, all I'm asking for is for us to formalize the position.
> Giving a proxy-maintainer an official acknowledgement will definitely
> att
Thomas Anderson wrote:
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 14:41:32 Petteri Räty wrote:
Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
Please elaborate on how a "full.fledged developer" would differ from a
"package maintainer" technically. What requirements and/or
priviledges do you think could be reduced?
Marius
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 14:41:32 Petteri Räty wrote:
> Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
> >> Please elaborate on how a "full.fledged developer" would differ from a
> >> "package maintainer" technically. What requirements and/or
> >> priviledges do you think could be reduced?
> >>
> >> Marius
> >
> > P
Thomas Anderson kirjoitti:
Please elaborate on how a "full.fledged developer" would differ from a
"package maintainer" technically. What requirements and/or
priviledges do you think could be reduced?
Marius
Perhaps there could be some honor code system at least, where the package
maintainer w
On 22:41 Wed 05 Mar , Anant Narayanan wrote:
> If it's not too late for this month's meeting, I'd like to discuss the
> possibility of including a new "post" in our developer base - the package
> maintainer.
...
> I'd really like for us to think through this proposal - I strongly believe
>
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 12:45:31 Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:41:58 +0530
>
> Anant Narayanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
> > > vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
> >
Please elaborate on how a "full.fledged developer" would differ from a
"package maintainer" technically. What requirements and/or
priviledges do you think could be reduced?
I haven't thought that through fully (in hopes of a few good
suggestions!), but off the top of my head, maintainers don't
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:41:58 +0530
Anant Narayanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
> > vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
> > Gentoo dev list to see.
>
> If it's not too late for this month's m
I totally second this proposal.
I think this would be especially great for small or rarely used packages. I
can think of at least a dozen packages that I'd love to see in Portage, but
they are not in the tree. Allowing for people that are not developers to
maintain easy or not crucial packages is
Hi,
If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
Gentoo dev list to see.
If it's not too late for this month's meeting, I'd like to discuss the
possibility of including a new "post" in our developer base -
23 matches
Mail list logo
