RE: [gentoo-dev] Jeeves IRC replacement now alive - Willikins
> If you would like to have the new bot in your #gentoo-* channel, would > each channel founder/leader please respond to this thread, stating the > channel name, and that they are the contact for any problems/troubles. Thank you for adding it to #gentoo-dev. Please also add to #gentoo-devrel and #gentoo-groupcontacts. Thanks for the efforts to bring us this bot. :) Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations
RE: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Reminder for August 7
> 2) Continued presence of forcefully retired devs It really baffles me that > some developers are forcefully retired for anti-social behavior, but are > not consequently banned from the places where they display this behavior, > such as our MLs and IRC channels. What good is it to retire developers, > but allow them to continue to be disruptive? I would like the Council to > decide for a change in our policy on this point. It could be a good precedent without being policy, or dependent upon the reason for being forcibly removed perhaps. It is quite possible for someone to find another way to contribute without having developer status, a necessary role that they find to be their niche. Bonsaikitten is one such person, he was forcibly retired about 2 years ago but is a positive contributor via Gentoo ops. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations
RE: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Reminder for August 7
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > "Alec Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I'm a maintainer and I'll say right out that I won't fix things > > >> unless they make sense to me; regardless of what some council says. > > > > > > Then I'd imagine devrel would have to step in. > > > > I highly doubt that would happen unless they want to risk alienating a > > group of active, useful developers over a disagreement over an ebuild > > format. > > So you're saying that devrel shouldn't and won't step in if developers > refuse to go along with a council decision? This centers around development and sounds like a QA issue first and foremost. QA has a strong relationship with devrel and would undoubtedly speak with devrel if they felt there was a QA violation that required devrel intervention/review for any particular developer. I believe this should address most questions: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0048.html > > There's a reason why Donnie pushed for having all Council agendas > > publicly discussed on the gentoo-dev ML before they are given a formal > > "stamp of approval" so that the ones deciding what gets in are the > > ones who are actually going to use it. > > Except for council decisions involving having devrel fire people, of > course. You may not be aware, but those are discussed in private on a > different IRC network to stop those evil Freenode people who don't > actually have any powers on Freenode from eavesdropping on secret > conversations using the backdoor they placed in the code they didn't > actually write. Please leave the dragging devrel and council through the mud discussions out of this as all you are doing is promoting further derailing of the discussion. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations
RE: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Reminder for August 7
> Fair enough. Let me wrap up the IRC part. > > 1. I'd like to ask Council to discuss possible reactions to our > developer being banned from Freenode without providing us with a > reason. The situation looks like one of Freenode staffers overreacted > over something Chris said during previous Council meeting and banned > him to prevent him from attending next meetings when he was supposed > to provide more information on the CoC topic. The ban was removed > after an hour, The ban was put in place on Sunday; the ban was lifted on Tuesday evening = way longer than one hour. Chris tried to speak to Freenode staff on Freenode but was told he was evading the ban and they would not speak to him there. He had to find out from me what the email address was (as it's not documented on Freenode's site) and email them to ask why he was banned. Christel responded later that day and simply apologized and removed the ban. Chris again emailed to ask *why* he was banned but Freenode staff has ignored his second email requesting information about his own ban. To me it looks like they not only will not tell us, they will not tell the individual who was actually banned and that is in poor professional taste and only further serves to drive a wedge between our ability to work with Freenode. > 2. I want Council to consider moving their meetings somewhere where > third parties can't control who in Gentoo can attend and who can't. This is an interesting idea. Perhaps a good trial for a transition? > 3. I want Council to consider creating and using irc.gentoo.org alias > instead of irc.freenode.net in our docs, news items and so on. Seems pretty logical so I just want to say that I like this whoever came up with this. :) > Debian did exactly the same a couple of months > ago prior to them moving out to OFTC > (http://www.debian.org/News/2006/20060604) This addresses a question I raised a few days back regarding whether we were concerned that Gentoo moving to any another network would have a negative impact on our community. This demonstrates that not only is this not a new idea, but that a peer community did the same thing. Does anyone have any contacts within Debian that would be willing to share their 'lessons learned' from the transition? Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations
RE: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-dev fortune submissions
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Chrissy Fullam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Whats this for? It sounds interest. > > Here's the output of `fortune gentoo-dev -m robbat2`: > > http://pastebin.osuosl.org/8802 > > Definitely of interest ;) The last fortune-mod-gentoo-dev set was > Saturday 28 July 2007 -- a new set is long overdue. Hooray for > robbat2!~ :) Hahaha... I've not used that but am interested now! :) Kind regards, Christina Fullam -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-dev fortune submissions
Whats this for? It sounds interest. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations > -Original Message- > From: Robin H. Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 11:26 AM > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-dev fortune submissions > > Have some good Gentoo laughs? > > This is a reminder that I collect input for the Gentoo-dev fortunes > database. If you have some to submit, please email them to me, > [EMAIL PROTECTED], with some combination of 'fortune' and 'gentoo-dev' > in the subject line. Should be formatted per the existing entries, and it > may help to include to clarification as to where and when the quote came > from as an attribution. > > While the fortune db is called 'gentoo-dev', I will take quotes from any > Gentoo IRC channel. > > I'd like to spin a new release later this afternoon since I've got a dozen > pending submissions, so bring it on folks. > > -- > Robin Hugh Johnson > Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy > E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Nominations for council
> >> Except you'd rather veto the ones you don't like. Hehe... It must > >> suck being > >> you, wanting to veto people and not being able to do it :) > > > > I trust the masses to do the sensible thing and not vote for people > > who'd be bad for the project. Hopefully that means we get the Council > > from last year, with one or two new faces? > > Hopefully everyone would be 'new' and only a couple of people (if not > less) repeat. This council hasn't really done anything right. I think we are losing site of the point here, that being council nominations and soliciting those nominees for their views on matters that any of us find relevant. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but how we share those opinions is a privilege not a right. Read: insults, attacks, and abrasive behavior are not acceptable and DevRel will not tolerate this. I encourage someone to talk about what they feel the next council could do better, or even list examples where they feel our current council went wrong, in their eyes; but do so in a manner that provokes civil discussion so we may all be the better for it. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] DevRel policy update
Wulf C. Krueger wrote: > How to gain power the easy way and obsolete conflict resolution in just > one commit: > > http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/poli > cy.xml?r1=1.18&r2=1.19 Neither Developer Relations as a whole or myself as the Lead acts without a system for checks and balances. If you read the policy change, such a system is in place. And if you notice, this 'power' is authorized by our elected Council. As this change directly affects developers only, please take further discussion to the Gentoo-core ML. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for April
> Petteri Räty wrote: > > I checked the current slacker script and it checks for having at least one > commit in last 60 days. We could of course just change the slacker script > to list the activity for everyone during the last 60 days and leave the > interpretation to undertakers. Interesting information, thank you for looking into the detail; I had been led to believe it was for 30 days. I do see value to modifying the script to list all activity, aiding undertakers in their task as well as useful information for those who may inquire. I do not rightly recall who wrote the script. Who can modify that script for us so we may test it out? Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for April
> Petteri Räty wrote: > > Mike Frysinger kirjoitti: > > This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the > > 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel > > (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) ! > > > > 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. > > Defining required amount of activity for ebuild devs. I would like us to > raise the required amount of activity for ebuild devs. Just committing > monthly is not enough imho to require a developer status. How does having > the average time between commits be at most a week sound and if it goes > under that, undertakers will get a notification? Devaway would be there of > course as usual Why four commits a month? Currently we are at one commit a month, any reason to quadruple it instead of requesting a slight raise, such as two commits a month? My concern is that not all developers who do contribute something each month can give Gentoo the commitment you request for every month. Should we lose their contributions as they are a smaller quantity because some people think that if you cant do more all the time then it's just not good enough? It seems that the goal should be to find positive ways to encourage more developers to become active, not start retiring those that cant give Gentoo as much time that others can. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release
> I thought we had learnt something about not communicating with our userbase, > but > it looks like this lesson has already been forgotten. While I appreciate there > probably are valid reasons for the delay of the beta and the release of > 2008.0, > I don't think there is any excuse not to update the published release > schedule, > nor for the utter lack of communication about this issue with our users. A > short > message on the frontpage of www.gentoo.org with a new (even if tentative) ETA, > and some kind of explanation for the delay would certainly be much > appreciated. While communication was sent via unofficial means we had intended to project a level of understanding to those actively involved, the update is simple: the untimely and quite unexpected surgical "complication" resulting in the death of my mother has set back a number of schedules, personal/professional/gentoo, for both myself and wolf31o2. We hope developers and users alike can be somewhat sympathetic as the family tries to cope with our loss of this truly dynamic and incredible woman. As a result, projects involving release engineering, developer relations, and events will be delayed until further notice. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Developer Relations changes
We've seen a lot of change in Gentoo recently and the Developer Relations team is no exception. We have reviewed our policy for the resolution of conflicts, found it to be in need of improvement, and have taken this opportunity to reorganize ourselves, as well. The Conflict Resolution project has been absorbed back into the parent project. Developer Relations now includes a role for Mediators, whose job is similar to that of the previous Ombudsman. The process for the resolution of conflicts is very similar to its predecessor, however the policy and process have been defined to provide more detail and guidelines. We invite you to check out the new policy: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml Developer Relations current mediator team consists of fmccor and tsunam, though we are looking to bring on additional staff for this and other tasks. If you have interest in participating, please join #gentoo-devrel and talk to us about your interests and ideas. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Feel free to bring up an issue with Developer Relations. They'll > > likely throw it out because YOU ARE NOT A DEVELOPER. Also, you'll > > notice that rather than call you names, which is really > your forte, I > > have instead pointed out why I think your opinion is completely > > worthless to Gentoo. If you feel insulted by people pointing out > > things like you being fired from the project due to your attitude, > > perhaps you shouldn't have gone and gotten yourself fired? I mean, > > you made your bed, now lie in it. > > I'm sorry, what do you do around here again? Could everyone just drop the 'mud slinging' already, from all parties/in all directions. The topic of this thread, and the relevant posts as best as I can tell, were about the council meeting. It's going on as I type, so the thread should be over. Join us in #council if you want to see your council at work, addressing the Gentoo business that you requested them to. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Item for 10 Jan 2008 Council meeting
> Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 09-01-2008 13:03:13 -0800, Chrissy Fullam wrote: > > You have a negative history with wolf31o2, and the details of which > > quite frankly should be kept off this mailing list. ... > > Let's take this discussion elsewhere. > > IMHO, you have a very big conflict of interest in this issue. > Why do you (for the second time) handle a case like this > one, and not someone else from devrel? > > I have a hard time to take your message as an objective and > unbiased one. I apologize if my email was not clear enough for you. I never said that I would, nor have any intention to, handle this case personally. I do however feel that a dispute/disagreement between two developers should not be taken to the mailing lists. Please let me be clear, I did not say I would personally handle this nor do I have any intention of personally handling this. My intent is to assign someone to attempt mediation. If mediation efforts fail, it will be escalated as per policy. I appreciate your opinion and your right to have such an opinion, however, I have a hard time understanding your reason for said opinion. I would expect any person to be able to say 'enough' and 'lets take this elsewhere.' If you feel that a person in DevRel can have no relationship with any other developer, friendship or otherwise, then you are sadly mistaken. And having any sort of relationship with any other developer does not then cloud your ability to think; if it does then that person has a host of problems to contend with, Gentoo being the least of them. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Item for 10 Jan 2008 Council meeting
> > > Ferris McCormick wrote:
> > > they get to devrel because you ensured there would be no one to
> > > catch them --- you are the one who wanted to kill off the
> > > proctors, after all.
> >
> > Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > ...and the finger-pointing starts... Bravo!
>
> Ferris McCormick wrote:
> To the extent you see this as a personal attack, I apologize.
> I never intended it as such. I was only recalling your email
> from 5 June
Fmccor, your comment about wolf 'being the one who wanted to kill off the
proctors' really served no purpose to the point; that being that the
proctors are no more and your personal curiosity as to how the CoC should
now be enforced. Adding no benefit to the point makes your comments useless
information. Your wording ('you ensured' and 'you are the one') only
furthers to make it useless information and appear very personal. 'You'
versus 'council' for example. You may honestly not intend it as such but
please be aware that it is easily interpreted that way when a simple change
of wording might have avoided this.
Wolf31o2 is not the council member who called to vote to disband the
proctors, and he is only one of five council members who voted to disband
the proctors. I myself had private conversations with council members OTHER
than wolf31o2 who had expressed the desire to drop the proctor project. The
combination of those things justifies me simply stating that your statement
is incorrect. Sure he sent that lovely email that you provided us all;
doesn't mean much though as he's not the only one who said those things. He
took a stance, as a council member should do, I mean isnt that why we have
council? And he is one person who can contribute but not solely rule, isnt
that why we have several council members instead of just one person? Quit
giving him 'credit' for the entire thing.
> Ferris McCormick wrote:
> As for filing a devrel complaint, do so if you must. But as
> you know, policy strongly suggests you should talk to me
> first so we can figure out where the miscommunication is. We
> also might discuss why you chose to hang an attack on devrel
> onto my rather innocuous musings.
You have a negative history with wolf31o2, and the details of which quite
frankly should be kept off this mailing list. His negative experiences
throughout all of 2007 with Conflict Resolution and consequently Developer
Relations justify any of your alleged 'attacks on devrel.' Let's take this
discussion elsewhere.
And a final note, you have had to justify your 'innocuous musings' a few
times recently, on this list and other Gentoo lists. Perhaps that could be a
sign that you should mull over and validate those musings yourself before
throwing them at the rest of us. Might cause fewer 'misunderstandings' with
regards to your statements.
Kind regards,
Christina Fullam
Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Item for 10 Jan 2008 Council meeting
> Ferris McCormick wrote: > With all due respect, for some reason we don't have Proctors > anymore to enforce the CoC. Thus, things we would expect the > proctors to catch and handle under CoC get sent to devrel > instead. All I am doing is wondering out loud (now that CoC > is coming alive again) if we should start processing these > under CoC rules. I'm asking Council because CoC belongs to > Council, but I do not expect a ruling, just perhaps an > interesting discussion. See, these things can't be caught > before they get to devrel because you ensured there would be > no one to catch them --- you are the one who wanted to kill > off the proctors, after all. Please lay off the personal attacks here; it's getting beyond ridiculous. Wolf31o2 is not the only council member who wanted to 'kill off the proctors', see below: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20070712-summary.txt - Kingtaco wanted a vote to cancel the proctors. robbat2 wanted them to just die quietly if no material was forthcoming. Others called for a definate stand rather than the "die quietly". All 5 attending council members voted in favour of dropping the proctors. Seems to me that every council member in attendance decided they wanted to 'kill off the proctors.' Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Item for 10 Jan 2008 Council meeting
> Ferris McCormick wrote: > As always, I'd like a status report on Code of Conduct, with > three questions in mind: > > 1) Do we have an implementation schedule? It is already being enforced by a variety of teams as they find it applicable. > 2) Have we identified some warm bodies for it? Good question but need to clarify what those bodies will be doing before we can really go soliciting for them. > 3) Most devrel requests seem really to relate to CoC > violations. Would you like us to bounce those to the CoC > people, process them using CoC rules, or keep doing what we > are doing now (generally, close them with a note explaining > why or mediate them)? (I'm talking about the "He's being > rude/sarcastic/disrespectful" sorts of things which really > need to be processed immediately and merit a warning or brief > suspension if > anything.) My understanding, based off a conversation with Council member dberkholz, was that 'bodies' would be needed to enforce CoC on #gentoo-dev and the gentoo-dev ML. As for enforcing it elsewhere, that would be up to the teams who already do just that and new teams would not be needed for that. This would include forum moderators, channels with specific purpose (i.e. #gentoo-infra would be moderated by infra), and DevRel and UserRel would continue to enforce CoC violations elsewhere and as escalated. I can only speak for the DevRel group and say that there is no reason to change that with regards to us. The other teams seem to be doing fine in their areas as well, so I don't see a reason to make any further changes, just add some people for the two areas that we'd like more moderation. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting summary for 11 October 2007
> Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > Here is the summary from today's council meeting. The > complete log will show up at - The CoC is in effect, but it needs a new enforcement section since the proctors were disbanded. The council is sending discussion of this to the gentoo-project list, to come up with proposals for three points: - who enforces it - musikc said devrel could - tsunam said userrel could I wanted to clarify, please understand the intent behind my part of the conversation was that devrel and userrel should continue to share the responsibility as appropriate, and continue to work together, including the questionable/overlapping areas. The above may have been misinterpreted by some to indicate 'pick which one', when my intent was a joined front on enforcing the CoC. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for October
> From: Ferris McCormick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for October > > Substantive > --- > It is not clear whether or not Gentoo currently has a Code of > Conduct or even if the Council wishes it to. > (1) whether the Code of Conduct is in effect; > (2) if so, how we enforce it. > (3) Code of Conduct explicitly calls out a Proctors group as its > executive arm, but previous Council disbanded the proctors. > (4) If we are not serious about having a Code of Conduct, I'd > like Council to explain why not. I think these are best addressed by Council members and look forward to that discussion. We can clearly see where Council disbanded the Proctors project (http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20070712-summary.txt), but it does not answer how the CoC would be enforced or if it should be rolled into a more general policy, enforced by existing teams (DevRel or UserRel come to mind.) I'm sure assumptions were made, however, they were not documented. > I will mention that devrel does receive complaints on > occasion which would properly fall under the Code of Conduct > and proctor control --- either because any policy violation > complained of falls under the Code of Conduct better than > under a devrel problem, Developer Relations has had no problem, reported or otherwise discussed, with addressing these issues. > or because it is a user/developer issue, Requests that are user/developer issue in nature should currently either go through User Relations or Developer Relations, depending on the nature, though we work together fine. > or because by the time it gets to us it's stale, I'm not aware of any issue escalated to Developer Relations that was stale by the time we were made aware, though I suppose the term stale is subject to interpretation. > Anyway, Code of Conduct status needs clarification and action. It seems that there is some confusion and that would certainly call for documented clarification. > Procedural > -- > > The election for this Council and its aftermath shows that we > are not sure how to handle a situation in which it appears a > candidate will not be able to serve if elected. As a more > extreme example than the one we faced this time, suppose a > candidate resigns or is suspended. I am still not sure, for > example, who are actually Council members right now. The current council is located on the Council page. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/ Flameeyes did send an email, that vapier resent for those who didn't get it, where flameeyes agreed that jokey would be his proxy while he focused on getting better and getting back to Gentoo work. In the past we have had Council members leave and be replaced, though I don't see the policy for that. Perhaps that should be included in the discussion of what to do when a Council member, even if they have a proxy, is away for an extended period or undetermined period of time. Maybe I've shed some insight, maybe I've confused some of you more, however I think these are good topics for discussion in the upcoming Council meeting. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Last Rites - August 27th - September 2nd 2007
> From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Hill > Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Last Rites - August 27th - > September 2nd 2007 > > If you like I can regenerate the list with them included, but > I don't plan on doing version-specific masks in the future > unless someone can come up with a good argument for it. >> Andrew Gaffney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'm not so sure. The last rites have historically always been for >> complete removals of a package from the tree. Is there any reason >> to change it? Just removing an older version of a package from >> the tree is something that happens all the time. >> Do we want to clutter up the GWN (as much as it needs >> content sometimes) with this unimportant information? I agree with Andrew, we don't need or want to clutter up the GWN. The last rites section is for full package removals and at this time we will refrain from the inclusion of slots/version removals. I encourage everyone to please think about this from a different perspective. With every change made to the GWN there are repercussions that the GWN staff faces. It would be greatly appreciated if discussions to change the GWN include the GWN team. We are responsive to GWN-feedback emails as well as channel inquiries in #gentoo-gwn. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Version Formatting Issues
> From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Duncan > Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Version Formatting Issues > > It's considered inappropriate for this list, which is > primarily for discussion of official Gentoo development > technical issues and policy, with an eye toward the fact that > it's a required subscription for every Gentoo dev. Questions > such as this don't need to bother all several hundred Gentoo > devs and staff, including those on infra or who otherwise > aren't working on ebuilds directly. I just wanted to clarify one thing: gentoo-dev is not a required mailing list for developers, it is a suggested list to join, nothing more. The required mailing lists are gentoo-core and gentoo-dev-announce. (The handbook has been recently updated to reflect this.) Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Public Relations -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Nominations open for the Gentoo Council 2007/08
> From: Josh Saddler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Meanwhile, I'll continue making a difference within Gentoo by > doing documentation for any and all interested parties, and > anything else I can contribute to, like the GWN. It's not > council work, but I'll continue to try to make Gentoo better > for everyone, at least in my little corner. :) Articles, articles, and more articles please! ;-) ~C -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Nominations open for the Gentoo Council 2007/08
Roy Bamford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>On 2007.07.21 10:47, Peter Weller wrote: >> >> My main plans over the next few years would be to improve >> communications (and (more importantly?) openness), not just between >> developers, but also between herds, users, the Council, the Trustees, >> upstream and so on. >> >> I'd particularly want to ensure that there is >> better communication between us (Gentoo) and projects such as Sabayon >> Linux and Ainkaboot, as I believe that we can all make use of each >> other's skills and ideas to provide better distribution(s). >> >> I'd encourage "innovative" ideas and projects, such as the inclusion of, >> for example, XGL/Compiz/Beryl/Compiz-Fusion or whatever it's called >> these days. >> >> I'd also encourage the introduction of targets, as discussed by antarus on >> the -core ML. And all that kinda stuff. > That's the beginnings of a good election manifesto. All the candidates need > to explain, if they are elected :- > 1. What they will do > 2. Why they will do it > 3. How they will do it > 4. Timescales for their plans. > This information will allow the electorate to choose a team with similar aims, so > we get a cohesive council, not a collection of individuals trying to take Gentoo > in different directions. I like this line of thinking, it really helps the rest of us in our voting decisions when we know what your plans are. I also agree with Neddy when he says it would be best if we could elect a council with similar ideas instead of each person potentially having completely different ideas. That said, I don't think the questions Neddy stated above should wait to be answered until someone is elected, we'd really need to know that up front to make an informed decision. Welp it appears to me that you had four plans in your email, and by the way thank you for being first to state them. Could you go back over them and respond to the how you would plan on doing it and under what time frame? (Innovative ideas are great, but don't mean much if they cant be executed.) Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | GWN Author -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo
Send an email to this address to be removed from the mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For your reference, and for any additional Gentoo lists you may be on, I have included the following link for further information: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/lists.xml Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | GWN Author -Original Message- From: Rick Sivernell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 5:17 AM To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo I am trying to contact somebody in charge of gentoo. I have tried for years now to get my email address off your list, but all has failed. If someone knows this person or will send me the email address so that I may contact them, I would appreciate this. Currently this is eating our bandwidth and I am sending all to the trash bin now. -- Rick Sivernell Dallas, Texas 75287 972 306-2296 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Registered Linux User -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
Could we try to keep this thread, and all the similarly named ones, on topic? The pointing fingers, trash talking, etc is not furthering anything. If you don't like councils opinion, or someone elses opinion, well respect them enough to allow them their own opinion. The real topic at hand is about this mailing list and the proposed changes. If you don't like those proposed changes, please think it through and make alternative suggestions. The original proposed idea: * Make -dev a moderated mailing list, imposing a delay on all emails sent by non-developers and adding devs to that same list as needed. All emails should be of a development nature and should stay on topic. Devs retain the right to discard moderated emails if they are off topic or inappropriate. Devs found to be abusing this privilege would undergo review by devrel for further action. Devs would be required to be on this list. * Make a new mailing list for the off topic conversations to go to. Not a requirement for devs to join but a place to continue on a topic that really isnt development related. I really don't think anyone on council honestly believes that there are no good alternative ideas out there so the we as the community need to come up with those alternatives. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | GWN Author -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] council and proctors
Ferris McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Wernfried Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> As far the CoC is concerned, i'm not sure what the current status is >> and if anyone is supposed to enforce it atm (devrel? userrel?). > I am sure not devrel. That's one reason we had proctors to begin > with. Council, I guess. While I cant say for sure what fmccor meant by the above comment, I can say that he is speaking for himself, not on behalf of the Developer Relations team. Developer Relations will continue to assist on requests and any extra bit that we can. We will see which way this ML thing takes Gentoo and offer our support in any way we can. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | GWN Author -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
>The -project mailing list ... is a required list for a dev to join. Sorry, NOT a required list for devs to join. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | GWN Author -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
On 7/12/07, Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All- > > We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to > where only devs can post, but any dev could moderate a non-dev post. > devs who moderate in bad posts will be subject to moderation > themselves. in addition the gentoo-project list will be created to take over what -dev frequently becomes. > there is no requirement to be on this new list. This was discussed in June's council meeting, then brought back up at today's council meeting, and slotted for voting in next months meeting. I do not think one could consider it a knee jerk reaction when there is so much time between conception, discussion, and voting. Having been active in those meetings maybe this will clarify it some for others... this is what I derived of it: The -core mailing list is for information too sensitive to be sent to the public. Does this information stay confidential until it's appropriate release time, no not always, but it is based on a sound principle so the list stays. The -dev mailing list would be the list for development discussion. The reason it does not replace -core is because it would still be open to be viewed by the public. Many devs have stated that they do not wish to read -dev presently due to the quantity of off topic emails, or at least those that are not productive. These devs would be able to continue to read -dev and reduce the volume of email to wade through to only those pertinent to the topic at hand. Non-devs would still subscribe and post, but those posts must first be approved by ANY developer. The method of contact has not been documented/discussed, one could presume IRC or email or even that one of the hundreds of developers might be active at that moment and decide to release that post. An additional method discussed was to have all non-dev emails on a timeout, pick a number of hours, and then the email if not moderated would be released. (non-dev sends his email, time period expires and no one booted it, so the email rolls through) The -project mailing list would be the place for the unmoderated and potentially off topic correspondence. I don't think anyone is married to the name. It also is a required list for a dev to join. The moderation of -dev would be done by any developer who saw fit to release the email sent from a non-dev. The release of "bad emails" would be addressed by devrel. What makes an email "bad" would be decided based on the principles of the Code of Conduct. See http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/coc.xml Hope this helps. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | GWN Author -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [half-PROCTORS] Re: [gentoo-dev] Bye Gentoo!
-Original Message- From: Wernfried Haas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 03:35:20AM +0200, Bryan Østergaard wrote: >> No matter how hard I try fighting for what I feel is right we seem to >> end up with petty fights, flamewars or what I consider even worse - >> people simply ignore what I'm working hard towards. On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 03:01:07AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> Sad to see one of the few remaining sane people leave. > I take this as a compliment to Bryan, but then still you are implying > that most of the people here are not sane. > I specifically also put in the quote by Bryan, because your comment in > this thread seems to sum up the problem quite nicely. If we can't even > have a thread where a developer leaves out of frustration without > general insults from you, there may be the need for the proctors to do > something about it. So please, be nice to other people. Amne, I do value your opinion but in this case, I respectfully disagree. I do not see the harm in what Ciaran said above to be any greater than another person stating "sad to see one of the best/key/etc leave" - by your standards that would imply the rest of us are less than best. Ciaran may be controversial at times, but I think we can see that he was paying Bryan a compliment. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations | Conflict Resolution GWN Author -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: [ANN] Multiple version suffixes illegal in gentoo-x86
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:12:49 -0400 Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't understand how nobody can see that the *TEMPORARY* injunction > against packages using this versioning scheme was put into place > *BECAUSE* nobody could agree on the solution. On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:22 Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mmm, no, what's weird is that you did it about two days after a solution was found... How is this conversation even relevant to development anymore? It sounds more policy, well questioning authority, and that is clearly meant for another ML. Can we please move on past the "how did the council decide to make this decision" and the "why did the council make this decision?" Try [EMAIL PROTECTED] for answers to those questions, after all, anyone can be on that ML so it's not like its going to be 'closed door' information. A more appropriate discussion for here would be "what do we do to start working with this decision?" Regards, Chrissy Fullam -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: Christina Fullam (musikc)
On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 11:52 +0200, Christian Heim wrote: >So please welcome Christina as a new fellow developer among us ! Thank you for the greetings! agaffney - good luck with that hazing thing and don't you have some liveCD stuff to work on? :-P Regards, Chrissy Fullam -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
