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 <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Reply-To: email@example.com
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> 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
>> <email@example.com> 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 ?
Deedra Waters - Gentoo developer relations, accessibility and infrastructure -
Gentoo linux: http://www.gentoo.org
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list