| 1 |
On 08/21/2015 08:50 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015, hasufell wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> Like allowing that devs may or may not use games.eclass, so that |
| 5 |
>> users cannot expect consistent behavior for games anymore? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Sorry, but that is not accurate. Usage of games.eclass has been |
| 8 |
> deprecated by QA [1] (with the council's mandate [2]), so devs should |
| 9 |
> not use it any longer. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Maybe QA should be stricter in enforcing its policies, in order to |
| 12 |
> avoid such false impressions in future? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Ulrich |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summaries#Games_team_policies_issue |
| 17 |
> [2] https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20140812-summary.txt |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
May I remind you that |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
""" |
| 24 |
- Motion: "The council encourages the games team to accept join |
| 25 |
requests and elect a lead. In the event they don't elect a lead |
| 26 |
within 6 weeks, we will consider the team as dysfunctional and thus |
| 27 |
disband it." |
| 28 |
Accepted with 6 yes votes and 1 abstention. |
| 29 |
""" |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
has never happened? There has been no vote, but the team has not been |
| 32 |
considered dysfunctional. Instead we are just acting like it doesn't |
| 33 |
exist, more or less. Sounds good? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
It seems, that QA is currently an "intermediate games project policy |
| 36 |
team". Is that its job? I don't think so. Maybe QA should have _less_ power. |
Archives