Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: formally allow qa to suspend commit rights
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 17:50:16
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: formally allow qa to suspend commit rights by William Hubbs
1 On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:26 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
2 > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:47:50AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
3 >> If Comrel really objects to this I'm not entirely opposed to letting
4 >> QA have the reins (certainly we can't just let policy go unenforced
5 >> entirely). However, I would encourage the teams to give some thought
6 >> as to whether it makes sense to work together to separate the human vs
7 >> technical factors here.
8 >
9 > What about the scenario where qa makes a change, then the dev, in a
10 > civil manor, explains to qa why he prefers his original method and
11 > reverts QA's change without the agreement of QA and without presenting
12 > his case to the council? Now you have another qa violation since GLEP
13 > 48 states that QA's changes must stand until the council says otherwise.
14 > However, assuming the exchanges between qa and the dev are still
15 > respectful, I'm not sure there is a personal issue.
17 It isn't a personal issue, but it is a personnel / human-factors issue.
19 A developer is refusing to follow policy. The CofC is but one policy
20 - all the GLEPs are policy, as is the Devmanual. A developer who
21 refuses to follow policy is subject to action by Comrel. At least,
22 that is how I see the roles of the groups (but I'm open to
23 counter-argument).
25 The other way to do things is to make both groups responsible for what
26 amounts to HR, but then we need to make sure we staff QA accordingly.
27 QA can't then just solve the technical problems and deal with people
28 like you might deal with code, otherwise the Council and/or Comrel
29 really will end up having to deal with a bunch of personal problems.
31 QA stepping in with temporary bans as a band-aid solution to a more
32 serious problem is fine. However, dealing with the inter-personal
33 issues requires a different sort of skillset. A developer who doesn't
34 follow policy is either unable to do so or unwilling to do so. Either
35 problem might be correctable, or perhaps we'll just have to go our
36 separate ways. I think Comrel should be the body that is staffed with
37 the right skills to make that determination.
39 Rich