| 1 |
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 04:37:52PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:09:01 +0000 John Mylchreest <johnm@g.o> |
| 3 |
> wrote: |
| 4 |
> | In this specific instance, impossible is effectively a point of view. |
| 5 |
> | For me the question comes down to this.. If QA trump maintainer, then |
| 6 |
> | who picks the QA staff? If anyone can become QA staff, then this is |
| 7 |
> | questionable in itself. is QA becoming another council with a sole |
| 8 |
> | purpose? If so I'd like to see an election again. At the end of the |
| 9 |
> | day the pack have to have faith in the team doing the work, and |
| 10 |
> | disagreements are obviously contrary to that. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> QA consists of whoever is on the QA project page. To be added, you must |
| 13 |
> convince the existing QA team that you know what you're doing. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
My point was the more along the lines that the existing QA team need |
| 16 |
to convince the rest of the development community that they know what |
| 17 |
they're doing first. Whats stopping the existing QA team disregarding |
| 18 |
all new applicants because they enjoy having authority? Especially when |
| 19 |
its mis-placed authority. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Role: Gentoo Linux Kernel Lead |
| 23 |
Gentoo Linux: http://www.gentoo.org |
| 24 |
Public Key: gpg --recv-keys 9C745515 |
| 25 |
Key fingerprint: A0AF F3C8 D699 A05A EC5C 24F7 95AA 241D 9C74 5515 |
Archives