Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA Team's role

[Daniel Goller]

On Sunday 26 February 2006 16:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:22:17 -0500 Mark Loeser <halcy0n@g.o>
>
> wrote:
> | Yes, Gentoo is supposed to be fun, but we also have a responsibility
> | to our users to ensure we are providing them with the best possible
> | distro we can.
>
> What, you mean the tree isn't someone's personal playground?

I do not know what he did refer to, however the following quote from 
ChrisWhite's blog does come to mind:
[snip]
"Well, I was told by ciaranm to "stop treating the tree like your toy" or 
something to that effect. Now, I'm going to respond to this with "Yes, it is 
my toy". Before you all go phsyco and what not, let's take a look at what 
Gentoo really is."
[/snip]

Following this is a rather sad rationalization as to why it is a toy.

http://www.securesystem.info/tiki-view_blog_post.php?blogId=3&postId=111

>
> | * The QA team may also offer to fix obvious typos and similar minor
> |   issues, and silence from the package maintainers can be taken as
> | agreement in such situations.
>
> Should probably clarify that one. It's in there because there are some
> situations where we find obvious typos (e.g. 'souce' instead of
> 'source' in DEPEND) and file a bug to alert the maintainer. If the
> maintainer fixes it within a few days, there's no problem, but if not
> there's no point in letting the bug sit there -- someone from QA should
> be able to fix it themselves.
>
> Equally, we don't want to just fix stuff without telling people that
> they made a mistake, because then they're more likely to do it again.
>
> | * The QA team will maintain a list of current "QA Standards".  The
> | list is not meant by any means to be a comprehensive document, but
> | rather a dynamic document that will be updated as new problems are
> | discovered.
>
> Hrm, do we want to include the thing about the QA standards providing
> rationale and explanations rather than hard rules here?