Verified Commit 23e7e84b authored by Konstantin Gizdov's avatar Konstantin Gizdov
Browse files

add proposal to rename TU role

parent 9bfa7561
Pipeline #11803 passed with stage
in 12 seconds
Rename the Trusted User role
- Date proposed: 2021-07-27
It is shown in some cases that the Trusted User role naming leads to some
confusion and misunderstanding in broader contexts outside Arch Linux. It is
furthermore recently been discussed that it also led to similar confusion
among members of Arch Linux as well internally. This RFC aims to remedy
that with a better suited term to reflect more accurately upon TUs' roles
and responsibilities as well as their position in the Arch Linux Organisation.
There have been several discussions among Arch Linux members both on IRC
and more recently (27th Jul 2021) on the mailing
list about the "Trusted User" naming (later referred to simply by
"the naming" or "the name") and its associated controversies.
Some relevant points of the discussion:
- The naming, i.e. "Trusted User", puts an unnecessary boundary between
Trusted Users and the rest of Arch Linux Staff, sometimes purely conceptually
but sometimes proved pivotally a burden. It suggests Trusted Users are
not full members of the project but external actors purely related on a
trust-only relationship to the rest of the staff. While this is important
during the application process, it becomes detrimental to developing stronger
and closer relationships between team members.
- The name should represent being a full member of and having a stake at Arch
- The name
- Are there any previous discussions? Link to them and summarize them (don't
force your readers to read them though!).
- Is there any precedent set by other software? If so, link to resources.
Rename the "Trusted User" role as is to become "Maintainer". As such, all
Arch Linux Trusted Users will become Arch Linux Maintainers. No other changes
about the role in question are included in this proposal.
TO-DO: Carefully consider every possible objection and issue with your proposal. This
section should be updated as feedback comes in from discussion.
Unresolved Questions
TO-DO: Are there any portions of your proposal which need to be discussed with the
community before the RFC can proceed? Be careful here -- an RFC with a lot of
remaining questions is likely to be stalled. If your RFC is mostly unresolved
questions and not too much substance, it may not be ready.
Alternatives Considered
TO-DO: A list of alternatives, that have been considered and offer equal or similar
features to the proposed change.
Supports Markdown
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment