Gentoo Archives: gentoo-qa

From: Mark Loeser <halcy0n@g.o>
To: gentoo-qa@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-qa] QA power to suspend access [WAS: Re: Roll-call for the team members and requesting a new election]
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 19:05:24
Message-Id: 20100821181142.GA32624@halcy0n.com
Splitting this since Piotr brought up something I wanted to.

Piotr Jaroszyński <p.jaroszynski@×××××.com> said:
> On 21 August 2010 19:46, Diego Elio “Flameeyes” <flameeyes@×××××.com> wrote: > > The role of the lead in this project cannot be simply a "supervising" > > one, given that it's the only member of the team that devrel is > > interested in hearing from (situation that, by itself, should probably > > be changed); it requires actual leading and decision-taking, especially > > given the current situation where many policies have never been written > > down, and our documentation resources for developers are scattered and > > outdated. > > I agree that this should probably be changed. I somehow recall 2 QA > members being able to make decisions on behalf of QA if quick action > is necessary.
This was brought up in a recent council meeting as well. I just haven't had a chance to write up an email to the list since I've been on vacation. 2 ideas were presented: 1) Have someone else that those powers can be delegated to (a co-lead or something) 2) If 2 QA members rule for suspension of access, then it is done. #2 seems to alleviate any bottlenecks that could happen. What does everyone else think? This can wait until after whatever is decided with the election, but the conversation should take place regardless. -- Mark Loeser email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://www.halcy0n.com

Attachments

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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-qa] QA power to suspend access [WAS: Re: Roll-call for the team members and requesting a new election] "Diego Elio “Flameeyes” Pettenò" <flameeyes@×××××.com>