Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Cc: comrel@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: comrel changes
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 20:31:35
Message-Id: 301112721c85c9604ed7081980bb785f16905c40.camel@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: comrel changes by William Hubbs
1 On Mon, 2020-02-17 at 12:10 -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
2 > On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 05:36:30PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
3 > > On Mon, 2020-02-17 at 10:18 -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
4 > > > Since comrel is a special TLP like QA, I think the comrel lead, like
5 > > > the qa lead, should be confirmed by the council.
6 > > >
7 > >
8 > > You may also want to have a GLEP for ComRel like GLEP 48 is for QA.
9 >
10 > This is a good idea; I will write one.
11 >
12 > ...
13 >
14 > > > To promote more transparency with comrel, I would like to
15 > > > require the comrel lead to send a report to the gentoo-project list monthly
16 > > > containing these statistics for the previous month:
17 > > >
18 > > > - number of bugs received
19 > > > - number of bugs pending (this is for bugs that are currently in process)
20 > > > - number of bugs resolved by actions (such as talking to
21 > > > developers or disciplinary action)
22 > > > - number of bugs closed without action
23 > >
24 > > Not sure if you wouldn't need more split, e.g. between requests rejected
25 > > as invalid, withdrawn or timed out.
26 >
27 > There's not a timed out or invalid status for comrel that I'm aware of,
28 > but withdrawn might be good.
29 >
30
31 What if ComRel decides that there are no grounds for the complaint made?
32 Or do you consider this equivalent to resolved?
33
34
35 --
36 Best regards,
37 Michał Górny

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: comrel changes William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>