On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 18:47 -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.
Some people don't want to be a dev. Some people can't commit the
resources to maintain dev status. There's a lot more responsibility in
being a dev then an AT, and some people don't want that. So, becoming an
AT is a way they can contribute without having to worry about all the
extra responsibilities involved with being a dev.
--
Homer Parker
Gentoo/AMD64 Arch Tester Strategic Lead
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[email protected] mailing list
