Splitting this since Piotr brought up something I wanted to.

Piotr Jaroszyński <p.jaroszynski@...> said:
> On 21 August 2010 19:46, Diego Elio “Flameeyes” <flameeyes@...> 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 outdated.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