Re: Drafting new rules for GURU

On 7/2/26 3:32 PM, Esteve Varela Colominas wrote:
>  > Prior to joining GURU, a new contributor is required to have at least 
> one (ideally a few) non-trivial contributions reviewed and merged via 
> pull requests or mailing list patches. These can involve new packages or 
> fixes to the existing packages. You should aim for proving that you can 
> commit and process feedback.
> 
> I think this is too vague and too daunting. This is the sort of language 
> that typically scares me off from even attempting to contribute, because 
> I'll doubt my ability thinking the thresholds for the given metrics 
> (non-triviality and feedback processing) are really high.
> 

A suggestion for a replacement for 5.1., although I don't know if this 
would be strongly worded enough:

"GURU is not the place for your first contribution to Gentoo. You should 
already have a history of ebuild development, usually via having pull 
requests merged to Gentoo or GURU already. If you haven't contributed 
before, please [contribute without GURU access](/some/new/doc?) a few 
times. Reach out in #gentoo-guru on Libera if you need any help."

One thing that I think may be lacking here is that right now, if you 
click on information for contributors, you get 
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:GURU/Information_for_Contributors 
-- which immediately says to file for GURU access as a prerequisite to 
getting started (even before git repos). By adding a section here about 
contributing via mailing list or Codeberg PR it may point people to a 
more productive outlet for their "first contribution". And of course, 
move the part about "File for an access request" to somewhere later in 
the document.

A note: I don't seriously contribute to GURU, and don't have a strong 
opinion about if this specific policy is enacted. I'm just trying to 
suggest perhaps another way to say the same thing or achieve the same goal.

--
Jay Faulkner