[arch-dev-public] TU application process
alad at archlinux.org
Tue Nov 6 19:51:46 UTC 2018
On 11/6/18 8:49 PM, Gaetan Bisson via arch-dev-public wrote:
> [2018-11-06 12:13:54 +0100] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public:
>> Le 06/11/2018 à 11:37, Allan McRae a écrit :
>>> But because you asked my opinion, I think a TU council is
>>> a really, really, really bad idea. No need to set some TUs above
>> Well some already are, because they are devs too.
> I do not understand this. When TUs vote, those who also happen to be
> devs only have one ballot each, just as any other TU. So how are they
> "set above" others? Being a dev does not grant you any extra TU powers,
> does it?
>>> We have never had a formal hierarchy in the developers (apart
>>> from our glorious leader),
>> Here again I would argue that they are devs that have [core] pushing
>> rights, as well as devs that are Master Key holders. So even if you
>> don’t want to write this black on white, this actually means a small
>> group of people have the real control over the distro (technically,
>> Master Key holders could revoke everyone else).
> I personally see the holding of master keys as a bureaucratic chore
> which I'm glad to have other people doing. Likewise, any dev with
> nonzero experience on the team can have access to [core] by just asking.
> Contrast this false hierarchies with the fact that anyone can send an
> email to arch-dev-public saying "I'm going to do this; any objections?"
> and a lack of replies from the community means "Feel free to go ahead."
> So there really is no hierarchy in the sense that no specific people
> decide what others can and cannot do. Like Allan said, I think this
> system has worked very well for Arch.
>>> and are instead run by those who step up to
>>> lead what needs done. I believe that this is what makes Arch work, and
>>> governance would be detrimental to the distribution as a whole.
>> Because you think Arch work, we (as some TUs/devs) think they are a
>> number of issues.
> We have certainly not run out of things to improve, but I seriously
> doubt that more bureaucracy will do anything to help.
Can we please (again) move this discussion to aur-general, I see enough
bureaucracy already, no need for it to be part of the development list
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the arch-dev-public