Re: [gentoo-guru] Reconsidering the open access model to GURU

[2026-06-28 17:43:26+0200] Michał Górny:
>Hello, everyone.
>
>Given that we had some problems within GURU recently (nothing serious,
>but still troubling) made me keep wondering recently if our fully "open"
>access model is the right approach.  While I'd like GURU to remain open
>to people and have a low entry barrier, I don't think it's exactly
>healthy to give people access only to cause conflicts and have it
>revoked a short while afterwards.  Given the more general situation
>around FLOSS nowadays, I'm also having more and more doubts when
>handling access requests.
>
>What I'd like to propose is that going forward, _before_ requesting push
>access to GURU, one has to get one or more pull requests or patches
>merged first.  They would be reviewed by existing GURU members, and
>referenced in the access request.
>
>Just to make it clear, I don't want to raise the bar significantly.  The
>goal wouldn't be so much to expect perfect commits, but rather to get
>one to learn the rough workflow and to make sure that they can respond
>well to feedback.
>
>That said, I'd like GURU to remain mostly self-maintained, so the
>proposal is mostly aimed at feedback from the existing GURU members.
>
>WDYT?

I think it makes sense. Although got two questions to make sure
we're on the same page:

- Would PRs/patches to ::gentoo would also count? (I guess they should)

- I guess this would mean guru-trusted@ would have to watch PRs?
   So far I haven't been watching those unless mentionned on
   #gentoo-guru IRC or getting tagged.

   Although maybe I should already have been watching those,
   my expectations of guru PRs were just for getting feedback from
   some people rather than being submissions to guru-trusted@.

Best regards