| 1 |
Diego Elio “Flameeyes” Pettenò <flameeyes@×××××.com> said: |
| 2 |
> Il giorno sab, 21/08/2010 alle 14.11 -0400, Mark Loeser ha scritto: |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > #2 seems to alleviate any bottlenecks that could happen. What does |
| 5 |
> > everyone else think? This can wait until after whatever is decided |
| 6 |
> > with |
| 7 |
> > the election, but the conversation should take place regardless. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I agree that #2 sounds the best. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> In case we all agree on that, should we ask devrel nicely to write that |
| 12 |
> down on their own policy or do we have to pass through council? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Well, we seem to have an agreement from the majority here, of 2. I'll |
| 15 |
push this through the council at the next meeting since it was my |
| 16 |
assignment to bring the discussion up. The exact text that will be |
| 17 |
replace is: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
If a particular developer persistently causes breakage, the QA team may |
| 20 |
request that devrel re-evaluates that developer's commit rights. |
| 21 |
Evidence of past breakages will be presented with this request to |
| 22 |
devrel. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
It will now become: |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
If a particular developer persistently causes breakage, the QA team |
| 27 |
can request infra to revoke the developer's commit rights, and will |
| 28 |
contact devrel to help mediate the case. The QA team can request that |
| 29 |
the commit rights be revoked either by the lead asking, or 2 members |
| 30 |
of the QA team requesting such an action be taken. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Thanks, |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Mark Loeser |
| 36 |
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org |
| 37 |
email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com |
| 38 |
web - http://www.halcy0n.com |
Archives