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

Michał Górny <[email protected]> Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:01:42 +0200
Newsgroups	gmane.linux.gentoo.devel
Organization	Gentoo
Message-ID	<[email protected]>
On Mon, 2026-06-29 at 14:44 +0200, Haelwenn (lanodan) Monnier wrote:
> [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)

Yeah, anything that proves you can do basic ebuild work and get it
right.  I kinda wonder if we should aim for some PRs with actual
feedback to see how you handle it, but that would be artificial.

> - 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@.

Maybe.  I think all GURU members may take part in PR review and merged
(provided they do a reasonably good review), so as long as someone
handles it, it'd just be a matter of looking at the linked PRs.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 293 B)