| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> - Project status reports once a month for every project |
| 6 |
>> Totally agree on this one! |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> OK. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I'll give you Release Engineering's "status reports" for September, |
| 11 |
> October, and November: |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> September: taking a well-deserved break |
| 14 |
> October: taking a well-deserved break |
| 15 |
> November: taking a well-deserved break |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> How about other projects that rely on things like upstream's release |
| 18 |
> cycle? What about projects that just maintain ebuilds? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Here's the games team's "status reports" for every month: |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> "Fixed more bugs, added more packages, cleaned up some ebuilds." |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Now, perhaps what everyone would like, instead, would be status reports |
| 25 |
> *where necessary* from certain projects? |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> In fact, the council has been discussing asking a few projects about the |
| 28 |
> status on some of their tasks. The main reason for this is for |
| 29 |
> communications purposes. Basically, we'd just get a "Hey, where are you |
| 30 |
> at on $x?" response from the teams. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> I don't *want* to drown projects in bureaucracy and paperwork. I want |
| 33 |
> them to *accomplish* things, instead. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
Hear, hear! ++ |
| 36 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 37 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
iD8DBQFFI8ZJrsJQqN81j74RAt5GAJ9UletQJrSllbOuk4WG1Ro+XEvlLQCfY9VE |
| 40 |
bLWnmc2rJ6Z6Mx9dmvnEQ7I= |
| 41 |
=JbqS |
| 42 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives