Gentoo Archives: gentoo-devrel

From: Deedra Waters <dmwaters@g.o>
To: gentoo-devrel@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 16:57:59
Message-Id: Pine.LNX.4.63.0509081156280.6803@monster
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc by Elfyn McBratney
Erm, the commitee would consist of those devrel people who origionally
volonteered to be part of the judge/investigation parts.

I'm not sure where you got the  "any dev" idea.
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Elfyn McBratney wrote:

> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 16:25:21 +0000 > From: Elfyn McBratney <beu@g.o> > Reply-To: gentoo-devrel@l.g.o > To: gentoo-devrel@l.g.o > Subject: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc > > On Tuesday 06 Sep 2005 17:02, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 11:19:48 -0500 (CDT) Deedra Waters >> >> <dmwaters@g.o> wrote: >> | Basically, for the most part, the transparency of how complaints are >> | handled stays the same. The only thing i really want to change, is >> | that i think that a commitee of say 3 to 5 people handles a complaint >> | from beginning to end. Basically, i think that this is much simpler, >> | and the devrel members i've mentioned it to seem to like this idea. >> | The big thing for most people is that what ever happens, the >> | transparency needs to stay, and i completely agree there. >> >> Mmmm, judge, jury and executioner. > > Eh ? I really don't see your point here. From past meetings I've attended, > this 'committee' will be made up of not just devrel members, but other > run-of-the-mill developers, too. > > So. Care to justify your statement ? > > Elfyn > >
-- Deedra Waters - Gentoo developer relations, accessibility and infrastructure - dmwaters@g.o Gentoo linux: http://www.gentoo.org -- gentoo-devrel@g.o mailing list