On വ്യാഴം 05 ജനുവരി 2017 10:20 വൈകു, Ximin Luo wrote: > Let's please talk about the specifics of this situation rather than appealing > to vague notions of being welcoming.
This is completely arbitrary restriction. I was thinking we evaluate people based on what they have done, rather than when and where they have done it. I don't agree with this notion. > It's my experience that events like these do not generally result in > long-term maintainers. Yes, I am indeed treating them as "inactive" before > they have already joined, based on what I have seen of related events. So I > propose some reasonable checks, to ensure that we get people who are > interested. I disagree that this attitude is flawed. This is pure prejudice based on your personal experience. We should not be basing our standards based on personal prejudice and paint a large number of people with same color. > I didn't propose a similar check for previous incoming contributors because > they did not have a background context of a mass-join event. So it does not > make sense to compare these two situations. Arbitrary and discriminatory. > We totally do validate membership (everywhere, not just this alioth group) > based on how people formulate their requests to join. Vague requests are > generally rejected in most places, and rightly so. > > Having minimum standards of quality is not "hierarchy". I have asked them to push their work to git.fosscommunity.in and send RFS mails to this list. Those who institute such bureaucracy should also volunteer to import these repos to alioth. I do not want to be forced to do extra work. Other option would have been using mentors.debian.net, but we lose the ability to incorporate their git history (or like now depend on external services). I will also look at possibility of using personal alioth repositories.
Description: OpenPGP digital signature