On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:27:15 +0200 Alexis Ballier <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:09:11 +0200 > Michał Górny <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello, developers. > > > > I have the pleasure :? > > to announce that we have formed a new Reviewers > > team [1] for Gentoo. The team is going to assemble developers > > willing to perform ebuild reviews and help contributors improve > > their ebuild skills. > > > > The main goal of the team is to handle GitHub pull requests. We are > > going to review incoming PRs, communicate with maintainers and merge > > them as appropriate. In particular, we're going to help willing > > contributors get high-quality, PGP-signed commits into Gentoo, > > therefore helping them prepare to become Gentoo developers. > > This is cool > > > The side goal is to review current Gentoo commits for major QA > > violations and other issues, aiming at improving the quality of > > ebuilds in Gentoo and helping other developers using bash, ebuilds > > and git effectively. > > This is completely unrelated: since we've had gentoo-commits ml, which was promptly utlised > every one has been able to do commit reviews easily, and most devs > have done so. Self-proclamed reviewers project certainly does not > have the monopoly of best practices nor perfect knowledge. I hope > they do keep the monopoly of being harassing though :) > > Also, you should probably focus on what's really important: reviews > like "this is weird, care to explain?" or stylistic nitpicks are just > a waste of every one time, meaning more important stuff does not get > done. > To my observation the reaction to this has been between displeasure and dismay. Yesterday the dev-ML was flooded with the first day's publication of the members' reviews. Firstly the gentoo-commits ML to my understanding is intended to be used for and by qa members. This project has one whom we presume has the discretion to declare the use of the qa hat at whim. As someone once put it, it's not the product or message it's the delivery of the package. This project in its creation is made of self appointed members who assume the status and qualification to suddenly launch their evaluations upon unsuspecting folk the community wide with neither warning nor their prior knowledge nor consent. The editing to the page illustrates already significant back pedalling from feedback already challenging its selected mode of delivery. The project goals and 'would be' mission statement are in fact legitimate and have the backing of Council members. The execution has been done independently, unilaterally and with no input or collaboration with Council to my knowledge. The actions of this project potentially impact on every developer / user of the gentoo project, addressing the core skills of both. Yet it has been made, announced and executed in this style. I invested study time in several units in teaching and lecturing in my university education under the education department. Sorry but the modi operandi by these self proclaimed teachers and educators thus far violate almost every fundamental principle in the art of teaching that I learned from the course. There have also been users who have expressed concern to me over this directly, some of which have indicated they will also email this list to make their views known. -- kind regards Ian Delaney
