[gentoo-dev] Gentoo/Accessibility Project
Dear Everyone, I've often wondered what happened to the Accessibility project in the last few months (especially since Ms. Waters went inactive). Well, as it turns out the Accessibility team has been basically one person: WilliamH. So, we took the opportunity this evening to adjust the mailing alias, the herds.xml list and the project page to make WilliamH officially the Team Lead for the project. If anyone is interested in helping him out please feel free to email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks! -- Seemant Kulleen Developer, Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Notification about MD5 support
Chris White wrote: Well, the problem that occurs here is the verification process. With MD5, you can hit most upstream sites, and they'll have an MD5SUM avaliable that you can authenticate against. Well if you care enough to verify this, you can easily create an md5sum of the fetched distfile yourself, and compare that with upstream :) Of course, if you want to verify digests of random packages without wanting to actually download and use them, then you would miss MD5 in the manifest, but how likely is that? -- Vlastimil Babka (Caster) Gentoo/Java -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] cleaning up forcing of all autotools
On Wednesday 13 September 2006 23:18, Mike Frysinger wrote: > i'm going to be fixing the autoconf/automake wrappers so that they no > longer require all versions of autoconf/automake ... this will resolve the > annoying circular dependency but at the sametime packages need to make sure > that if they use autotools, they pull in the correct version now that users can depclean versions, people are finding broken packages here's some notes for you devs ... use autotools.eclass and set the WANT variables and the eclass should take care of DEPEND for you need autoconf-2.13 (oh god why) ? then do this: WANT_AUTOCONF=2.1 inherit autotools how about automake-1.7 ? then do this: WANT_AUTOMAKE=1.7 WANT_AUTOCONF=2.1 inherit autotools dont care what version, you just want the latest ? then do this: WANT_AUTOMAKE=latest WANT_AUTOCONF=latest inherit autotools the autotools eclass will mung "latest" into the correct values -mike pgp1MK3GPz905.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 14:37 -0400, Alec Warner wrote: > > > > You cannot allow things to get out of hand like they do. Everyone here > > obviously wants to make gentoo better. However, NOT everyone has the right > > to do so. > > Not everyone has the right? I think the GPL would preclude that > statement. Not everyone has the *drive*, or the social skills, or the > technical prowess; but we all have the right. This is FOSS after all ;) Ehh... The GPL doesn't say that *Gentoo* has to do something. Yes, as an individual, one has the right to take Gentoo's software and do Their Own Thing(tm) with it, so long as they follow the GPL. However, that does not mean that Gentoo itself has to have any part in it. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
You cannot allow things to get out of hand like they do. Everyone here obviously wants to make gentoo better. However, NOT everyone has the right to do so. Not everyone has the right? I think the GPL would preclude that statement. Not everyone has the *drive*, or the social skills, or the technical prowess; but we all have the right. This is FOSS after all ;) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Notification about MD5 support
On Thursday 21 September 2006 08:54, Hanno Böck wrote: > I think sha256/512 is the only thing that makes sense at the moment, as it > most probably will stay secure for quite a while and we don't have real > alternatives. So imho use sha256, get rid of everything else, because that > rarely improves security, and wait for the nist to define something new > (which will happen, but probably take some years from now). Well, the problem that occurs here is the verification process. With MD5, you can hit most upstream sites, and they'll have an MD5SUM avaliable that you can authenticate against. With SHA256, you would need an upstream that actually implements them as hashes for release notifications. Without this sort of verification, there's a better chance of someone putting out some kind of exploit tarball, us hashing it as per the usual, and the whole purpose gets defeated. Yes, you can consider that developers should be going in and checking the changes, etc., but the problem it's something a lot of devs would be less likely to do versus an easy md5sum lookup. -- Chris White Gentoo Developer aka: xx (Scissors Were Here) xx pgpLZFG6ufmNv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Notification about MD5 support
Am Donnerstag, 21. September 2006 16:49 schrieb Vlastimil Babka: > Although the "more secure than MD5" part is now questionable, I suppose > the "directly available in python" part still holds? From "What's new in python 2.5" 13.3 The hashlib package A new hashlib module, written by Gregory P. Smith, has been added to replace the md5 and sha modules. hashlib adds support for additional secure hashes (SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512). When available, the module uses OpenSSL for fast platform optimized implementations of algorithms. The old md5 and sha modules still exist as wrappers around hashlib to preserve backwards compatibility. The new module's interface is very close to that of the old modules, but not identical. The most significant difference is that the constructor functions for creating new hashing objects are named differently. I think sha256/512 is the only thing that makes sense at the moment, as it most probably will stay secure for quite a while and we don't have real alternatives. So imho use sha256, get rid of everything else, because that rarely improves security, and wait for the nist to define something new (which will happen, but probably take some years from now). cu, Hanno pgpT6B2kaucaK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
Peter wrote: On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:13:23 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: I just want to prefix this by saying that I was simply going to ignore your posts in this thread completely due to your obviously inflammatory nature at the beginning. Now that you're posting actual constructive criticisms, I'd like to respond. By the way, thank you for changing your tone to something more productive. Bunk! Unnecessary to write. Why not just plonk me and be done with it. Nothing I wrote was inflammatory at all. My criticism of the recruitment process stand. Your response was welcome. The prefix was condescending and offensive. You, as leaders, have to really think through what your intentions are and how you are going to deal with people and factions with various objectives. Telling people they are obviously inflammatory is really not a strong way to begin. I believe you just proved his point. -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project Today's lesson in political correctness: "Go asphyxiate on a phallus" -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: seeds, GLEPs, and projects
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:06:16 -0400, Mike Kelly wrote: > On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:43:16 + (UTC) > "Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a >> timely fashion. And, any potential devs would be rather turned off by >> the goings on here. You guys seem to try and stifle innovation at >> every turn -- trying to turn Gentoo into GLEPtoo. Instead of >> progress, you have arguments. Instead of innovation, you have >> arguments. Instead of new blood, you lose people. > > Hi, not so. I've just joined on as a dev, my recruitment process > happened in a timely fashion. After I passed all my quizzes, I became a > dev. I think we also had at least 3 other new folks in the past few > weeks, and maybe 1 person leaving. > Not timely. Incredibly fast. I've never seen a one week soup to nuts developer approval. However, others still languish. See bz. -- Peter -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:13:23 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > I just want to prefix this by saying that I was simply going to ignore > your posts in this thread completely due to your obviously inflammatory > nature at the beginning. Now that you're posting actual constructive > criticisms, I'd like to respond. By the way, thank you for changing > your tone to something more productive. > Bunk! Unnecessary to write. Why not just plonk me and be done with it. Nothing I wrote was inflammatory at all. My criticism of the recruitment process stand. Your response was welcome. The prefix was condescending and offensive. You, as leaders, have to really think through what your intentions are and how you are going to deal with people and factions with various objectives. Telling people they are obviously inflammatory is really not a strong way to begin. -- Peter -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
I just want to prefix this by saying that I was simply going to ignore your posts in this thread completely due to your obviously inflammatory nature at the beginning. Now that you're posting actual constructive criticisms, I'd like to respond. By the way, thank you for changing your tone to something more productive. On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 13:26 +, Peter wrote: > Having a democratic organization is great. Having a community-run distro > is great. However, it's a little utopian and unrealistic when situations > like this arise. You need a group to lay down the law and establish > control. Otherwise, you may find yourself in a situation where good people > with differing points of view just get fed up and leave the fold. That > would be a loss for everyone. This is something that most of the new council feels needs to be done. Gentoo has been run as an anarchy for far too long. The "leadership" has been pretty far removed from the day-to-day activities for some time. This isn't necessarily the fault of the people in power so much as the failing of all of us. Every single developer is responsible for the situation we now find ourselves in through our inaction and apathy. Let's stop this now and work towards cleaning up our house. > Similarly, you cannot allow certain individuals with little or no standing > to try and dictate what policy vis a vis a proposed project should be. > Otherwise, you end up in a real mess. Dictate, no. Suggest, absolutely. > When new ideas are proposed and developed, gentoo's leadership must be > involved from the beginning. This will head off these 100 thread > flamefests, allow project originators to know where they stand, and allow > those who disagree to know that there is authority. I agree, wholeheartedly. I think that some of the principles under which we are currently running are simply flawed. While putting unnecessary restrictions on projects is definitely not a way to innovate, having no controls, whatsoever, leads to complete anarchy. There are many contributing factors to these problems. This is nowhere near an exhaustive list, but a simple one from the top of my head. - The council is not involved in new projects. - New projects do not undergo a design phase to attempt to add sanity to them prior to their announcement/official status. - Projects do not communicate with each other. - Existing projects are not informed of possible parallels with new projects, resulting in duplication of work, hard feelings, and a lack of good resource utilization. - There are no ramifications against developers who do not follow the decisions made by the council. - The council, even after the recent change to allow meetings outside of the monthly schedule, is limited in its ability to make decisions in q quick and decisive manner. > You cannot allow things to get out of hand like they do. Everyone here > obviously wants to make gentoo better. However, NOT everyone has the right > to do so. NOT everyone has veto power or authority to approve. Correct. The council is nominated and voted on by the developers to represent them. This should give the council the power to do what is necessary to promote Gentoo and to improve Gentoo. > That's what's missing from this process. I think the council has been far > too quiet and policy far too vague which makes new ideas so difficult and > controversial. Agreed. However, the new council has only been official for 11 days, now. Some of us are just now getting the feel of what is involved, and we are discussing possible changes that need to take place. I propose that we start discussing more on #gentoo-council and come forth with some ideas for improvement by the 29th of September (1 week from now) to be brought up at the next meeting and voted upon. > You can't have a socialist model for a business. It simply does not work. > A union cannot run an auto company. You need leadership. Gentoo cannot be > run by 100 developers concurrently (yes, I know there are 300, but how > many of those are actually contributing?). There has to be a chain of > command. Otherwise, you are rudderless. This has been the problem with Gentoo since Daniel left, quite honestly. While things were far from perfect back then, the chain of command was much more defined. Currently, there is no chain, at all. Again, I thank you for the constructive ideas and hope that this spurs some discussion on how the council can act to improve Gentoo. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: seeds, GLEPs, and projects
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:43:16 + (UTC) "Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a > timely fashion. And, any potential devs would be rather turned off by > the goings on here. You guys seem to try and stifle innovation at > every turn -- trying to turn Gentoo into GLEPtoo. Instead of > progress, you have arguments. Instead of innovation, you have > arguments. Instead of new blood, you lose people. Hi, not so. I've just joined on as a dev, my recruitment process happened in a timely fashion. After I passed all my quizzes, I became a dev. I think we also had at least 3 other new folks in the past few weeks, and maybe 1 person leaving. While getting fresh blood is a good thing, you've gotta be sure that the new blood is up to snuff. That takes some time. There's nothing to stop them from contributing before they're "official." Hey, look at what the other Summer of Code-ers and I did over the past few months. Some of us have become devs, others haven't, but we all made sizable contributions to Gentoo development. -- Mike Kelly signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Seemant Kulleen wrote: > (well, it's run more like a commune, but anyway). I *knew* someone else was using my soap!!! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFE+t8rsJQqN81j74RAuYUAJ4qa9GuyISG5PdVHq3Nuo58lBmmFgCgk4z/ v9OPVn4PCae9GhD40HGKf1M= =yjMD -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
Peter, Your two cents are worth a lot. Pretty much all of what you've said has been echoed time and again on this list and on the -core list (and probably an irc channel or two). The concept of "business" aside, the points you make about having a leadership in place are on target, in my opinion. Thanks, -- Seemant Kulleen Developer, Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
Peter wrote: [Fri Sep 22 2006, 07:29:57AM CDT] > We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are > customers. No users, no distro. Actually, I still think that agriffis was correct in his assertion that most devs work on Gentoo for their own interests, and that the developers are our distro's primary consumers. It is amazing that so many others find our work useful, and we very much appreciate the Gentoo community that has formed. Consequently, we are willing to do our best to provide a distro that scratches our users itches as well as our own, but ultimately it is developer self-interest that keeps things going. -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 pgpzB2b6XFdtf.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 08:55:14 -0400, Seemant Kulleen wrote: > On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 12:29 +, Peter wrote: > > >> We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are >> customers. No users, no distro. > > That is not strictly true. You can have a distro without users -- > nobody but you would be using it -- it's still a distro. It all depends > on what you expect out of the project. I think Sejo's got the right > idea this time -- this distro is just a community, and that's how it's > run (well, it's run more like a commune, but anyway). If it were run > like a business, the behaviour would be a lot different (and a lot more > closed). For starters, there would actually be a leadership situation > in place. You can argue that Gentoo *began* its life as a business, but > the past three years have been far removed from that paradigm. > > And, IMHO, that's a problem. A business, per se, does not necessarily mean for profit or even to generate revenues. However, one may argue that a business should provide a service or manufacture something -- even if for free. That said, the community aspect of gentoo, while altruistic, has its problems when it comes to adjudicating disputes or greenlighting projects. Look at the chaos with Seeds! Some very vocal opponents, vocal supporters. People advocating a Glep, others against it. Problem is, no leader can or does say anything to squelch the dispute and allow the issue to either move on or go completely unofficial. That the dispute remains unresolved causes ill feelings to linger, allows the people on either side to dig in to their respective positions harder and looks plain dumb. Good points have been raised on either side, although there are some very strong voices that seem to dominate the discussion. However, those voices are NOT from the council. Do those voices have the authority to change policy? Make policy? No. Having a democratic organization is great. Having a community-run distro is great. However, it's a little utopian and unrealistic when situations like this arise. You need a group to lay down the law and establish control. Otherwise, you may find yourself in a situation where good people with differing points of view just get fed up and leave the fold. That would be a loss for everyone. Similarly, you cannot allow certain individuals with little or no standing to try and dictate what policy vis a vis a proposed project should be. Otherwise, you end up in a real mess. I once served on a board with 39 members. It was a national association charged with pr and marketing of it's core service. The 39 members came from important companies from around the nation each in this business. Despite the wonderful intentions of the board -- to promote our industry, lobby the government (state, local, and federal), assist smaller players -- agreement on even the most minor items took forever. Ultimately, after a few years, the board was reduced to 13 and became more productive. When new ideas are proposed and developed, gentoo's leadership must be involved from the beginning. This will head off these 100 thread flamefests, allow project originators to know where they stand, and allow those who disagree to know that there is authority. You cannot allow things to get out of hand like they do. Everyone here obviously wants to make gentoo better. However, NOT everyone has the right to do so. NOT everyone has veto power or authority to approve. That's what's missing from this process. I think the council has been far too quiet and policy far too vague which makes new ideas so difficult and controversial. You can't have a socialist model for a business. It simply does not work. A union cannot run an auto company. You need leadership. Gentoo cannot be run by 100 developers concurrently (yes, I know there are 300, but how many of those are actually contributing?). There has to be a chain of command. Otherwise, you are rudderless. JM$0.02 -- Peter -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 12:29 +, Peter wrote: > We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are > customers. No users, no distro. That is not strictly true. You can have a distro without users -- nobody but you would be using it -- it's still a distro. It all depends on what you expect out of the project. I think Sejo's got the right idea this time -- this distro is just a community, and that's how it's run (well, it's run more like a commune, but anyway). If it were run like a business, the behaviour would be a lot different (and a lot more closed). For starters, there would actually be a leadership situation in place. You can argue that Gentoo *began* its life as a business, but the past three years have been far removed from that paradigm. Thanks, -- Seemant Kulleen Developer, Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
Peter wrote: > We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are > customers. No users, no distro. I haven't received a single paycheck in two years. What a shitty business. -- Kind Regards, Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:14:24 +0200, Jochen Maes wrote: snip... >> I appreciate your POV. Yes, you can't expect too much from volunteers. >> But, in a worldwide linux distribution, which is run more or less like >> a business, there is a higher standard that should be adhered to. I >> don't accept slackers or inefficiency in my business, and nor should >> gentoo. >> >> Why are you no longer a gentoo-dev, btw? >> >> > because i was sick of people discussing things that they knew shite > about and cluttering up the mailinglists. THAT is not a reason to cease being a dev. Come on, you can do better than that. > you _can't_ compare gentoo with a business. simple as that arf, why did > i even start... > We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are customers. No users, no distro. > /me closes dev mailbox for another month Well, there is a lot of clutter sometimes :) -- Peter -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
Peter wrote: > On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:15:14 +0200, Jochen Maes wrote: > > snip... > > >>> glad you were an exception. >>> >>> >>> >> glad i never knew you when i was a gentoo dev... I know one thing, you >> won't ever get a hump out of me! >> > > You're arguing a different point. I was commenting on the time delay, and > you responded with how difficult it is to be a recruiter. If the delay is > long then there is a problem. If you run a business and you want to hire > someone, yet you wait and wait and wait, it's quite possible the recruit > may accept another position. That's a loss to you. Same with potential > gentoo developers. When someone goes through the trouble to complete > tests, work with his/her mentor, spend time on bz, etc., the least they > can expect is courteous response when they choose to become a dev. > Perusing through recruitment bugs, you can see long lapses. It IS > inexcusable. > > Yes, everyone does gentoo voluntarily, but that does not mean less should > be expected. It reminds me of the time my 5 year old cousin sadly was in > the hospital, and the nurse needed to take yet another blood sample. The > nurse said "I'm sorry I have to take blood again. I don't like to hurt > little boys." To which my very sharp cousin replied, "So, why are you in > this business?" > > If a gentoo dev joins a particular project to perform a particular task, > he/she IS making a commitment to it. The dev should have known in advance > what's expected and the time required. AFAIK recruiters are hardly > overworked. There is no overfull pipeline of dev recruits banging on the > doors. > > Simple courtesy requires they handle recruiting bugs quickly and > efficiently with either a Welcome or a thumbs down. Dragging the > recruitment out only makes it harder to get new recruits. They are, in > effect, working against themselves and their own goal. > > >> glad i never knew you when i was a gentoo dev >> > > I have been recruited 3 times to be a dev, and declined. I find the gentoo > hierarchy and organization stifling and the amount of roadblocks to > progress ridiculous. > > I appreciate your POV. Yes, you can't expect too much from volunteers. > But, in a worldwide linux distribution, which is run more or less like a > business, there is a higher standard that should be adhered to. I don't > accept slackers or inefficiency in my business, and nor should gentoo. > > Why are you no longer a gentoo-dev, btw? > > because i was sick of people discussing things that they knew shite about and cluttering up the mailinglists. you _can't_ compare gentoo with a business. simple as that arf, why did i even start... /me closes dev mailbox for another month -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:15:14 +0200, Jochen Maes wrote: snip... >> glad you were an exception. >> >> > glad i never knew you when i was a gentoo dev... I know one thing, you > won't ever get a hump out of me! You're arguing a different point. I was commenting on the time delay, and you responded with how difficult it is to be a recruiter. If the delay is long then there is a problem. If you run a business and you want to hire someone, yet you wait and wait and wait, it's quite possible the recruit may accept another position. That's a loss to you. Same with potential gentoo developers. When someone goes through the trouble to complete tests, work with his/her mentor, spend time on bz, etc., the least they can expect is courteous response when they choose to become a dev. Perusing through recruitment bugs, you can see long lapses. It IS inexcusable. Yes, everyone does gentoo voluntarily, but that does not mean less should be expected. It reminds me of the time my 5 year old cousin sadly was in the hospital, and the nurse needed to take yet another blood sample. The nurse said "I'm sorry I have to take blood again. I don't like to hurt little boys." To which my very sharp cousin replied, "So, why are you in this business?" If a gentoo dev joins a particular project to perform a particular task, he/she IS making a commitment to it. The dev should have known in advance what's expected and the time required. AFAIK recruiters are hardly overworked. There is no overfull pipeline of dev recruits banging on the doors. Simple courtesy requires they handle recruiting bugs quickly and efficiently with either a Welcome or a thumbs down. Dragging the recruitment out only makes it harder to get new recruits. They are, in effect, working against themselves and their own goal. > glad i never knew you when i was a gentoo dev I have been recruited 3 times to be a dev, and declined. I find the gentoo hierarchy and organization stifling and the amount of roadblocks to progress ridiculous. I appreciate your POV. Yes, you can't expect too much from volunteers. But, in a worldwide linux distribution, which is run more or less like a business, there is a higher standard that should be adhered to. I don't accept slackers or inefficiency in my business, and nor should gentoo. Why are you no longer a gentoo-dev, btw? -- Peter -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
Peter wrote: > On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:25:26 +1000, Andrew Ross wrote: > > snip... > >>> That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a timely >>> fashion. >>> >> As a recently recruited developer, I'd just like to say that I was very >> happy with the approval time of my recruitment bug (#139633), which was >> filed on 2006-07-07 and resolved on 2006-08-08. >> >> I understand that not all recruitments occur as quickly as mine, >> > > you are the exception. > first of all, i may not be a recruiter anymore nor even a gentoo dev, but find it appalling that again this issue arises. > >> If recruiters are taking that long, but it's due primarily to a lack of >> manpower, >> > > or poor organization. > > there is a good organisation, but the problem lies in that there aren't many recruiters and that they are burned out very quickely. The 2 quizzes needed must be sent in one by one, approved by a recruiter and then a small interview is needed (for each quiz) concerning the quiz. When i did my recruitements the first quiz always took between a half hour till and hour and a half. The second at least an hour. (read, check, ask questions). Then you need to add the person to the system, which takes a few commands on different systems. Overall recruiting 1 person takes about 2-3 hours at least. None of the recruiters and solemnly recruiters, they all work on other things for gentoo also. This takes time and you can't say to someone hey i'll check you half, tomorrow half again and then day after i'll do the addition itself. The time it takes is providing you are online at the same time, and that the persons connect their recruiters after the mentor approved the quiz. I've had lots of recruitements where they send in the first quiz, but i had to wait a month or 2 for the second. In these 2 months you are busy tracking the person, trying to contact him etc. recruitement of 1 person takes a lot of time if you want to do it correctly. The way the organisation works is as good as we can do it. >> Not all developers are cut out to be recruiters, and I'm sure some of >> those who have what it takes would rather work on something else :-) >> Much like infrastructure, my impression is that being a recruiter isn't >> exactly a glamorous role. On top of that, the actions a recruiter must >> perform for each recruitment aren't exactly 5 minute jobs: >> >> > > months of silence in the many cases unlike yours are rude and inexcusable. > same for the people asking to be recruited, we see that all the time. and it's easy to complain and nag, but is there any constructive critisism here? > >> Cheers >> >> Andrew >> > > glad you were an exception. > > glad i never knew you when i was a gentoo dev... I know one thing, you won't ever get a hump out of me! -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:25:26 +1000, Andrew Ross wrote: snip... >> >> That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a timely >> fashion. > > As a recently recruited developer, I'd just like to say that I was very > happy with the approval time of my recruitment bug (#139633), which was > filed on 2006-07-07 and resolved on 2006-08-08. > > I understand that not all recruitments occur as quickly as mine, you are the exception. > > If recruiters are taking that long, but it's due primarily to a lack of > manpower, or poor organization. > Not all developers are cut out to be recruiters, and I'm sure some of > those who have what it takes would rather work on something else :-) > Much like infrastructure, my impression is that being a recruiter isn't > exactly a glamorous role. On top of that, the actions a recruiter must > perform for each recruitment aren't exactly 5 minute jobs: > months of silence in the many cases unlike yours are rude and inexcusable. > > Cheers > > Andrew glad you were an exception. -- Peter -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Delay in approval of new developers
Peter wrote: > On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:01:02 -0400, Mike Pagano wrote: >> Maybe a recruiting drive to help with the maintenance. A typical >> business brings on new blood and assigns them just that role to free up >> more senior developers for more complicated projects. >> >> New developers should definitely meet a standard, but the possibility of >> bringing developers with energy and potential to assist in maintenance >> might be worth a consideration. > > That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a timely > fashion. As a recently recruited developer, I'd just like to say that I was very happy with the approval time of my recruitment bug (#139633), which was filed on 2006-07-07 and resolved on 2006-08-08. I understand that not all recruitments occur as quickly as mine, but I also accept that Gentoo is comprised solely of volunteers, and that devrel (and particularly recruiters) are understaffed (in terms of available manhours - not necessarily project members). > Having developers submit ebuild quizzes and > then not hear for 6 weeks is silly. I'll assume here that you're referring to hearing back from recruiters, rather than a mentor. If a mentor is taking that long to respond they need to be replaced, as per http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/recruiters/mentor.xml If recruiters are taking that long, but it's due primarily to a lack of manpower, then there's not much that can be done to improve the situation. It's not like the potential-dev has to sit around twiddling their thumbs - bugs still need to be fixed, and if there's a holdup with devrel the mentor can offer to commit things on behalf of the recruitee. Not all developers are cut out to be recruiters, and I'm sure some of those who have what it takes would rather work on something else :-) Much like infrastructure, my impression is that being a recruiter isn't exactly a glamorous role. On top of that, the actions a recruiter must perform for each recruitment aren't exactly 5 minute jobs: "Recruiters need to possess several talents in order to successfully oversee additions to the development team. First and foremost, a recruiter needs to be a good judge of character. While most new developer sponsors pick only the best candidates, there have been and will be occasional duds. Recruiters need to be able to analyze an individual's background, experience, and past contributions, then use that information to decide whether or not to accept a developer. Recruiters also need to be aware of the big picture in order to recognize weaknesses in the organization and accept developers who will shore up those weaknesses." http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/recruiters/ Cheers Andrew signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New project: Gentoo Seeds
Alin Nastac wrote: > Our civilized disputes are taken place in public because we are an open > organization. If this looks bad in the eyes of some, so be it, but > please keep your opinions out of this list. Except that they're not always that civilized, which was his entire point. -- Kind Regards, Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New project: Gentoo Seeds
Dice R. Random wrote: > What control mechanisms are there within the Gentoo community to keep > a few bad apples from spoiling the whole barrel, as it were? I do not > wish to name any names, but it seems to me from having skimmed this > list for the past few years that there are a couple people who are > continually embroiled in flame wars and, in my opinion, are bringing > discredit to Gentoo in general and the developers in particular. Enough is enough! Just because some devs are more temperamental than the others, doesn't make them "bad apples"! Our civilized disputes are taken place in public because we are an open organization. If this looks bad in the eyes of some, so be it, but please keep your opinions out of this list. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
