| 1 |
Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Not really, because my opinion that devrel shouldn't be involved is not |
| 4 |
> automatically turned into reality (much to my regret). I'm trying to |
| 5 |
> supply evidence why this should stay between QA and infra. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>> at any rate, you're proposing giving the control to the QA team which |
| 8 |
>> has no guidelines or processes outlined, let alone the manpower. |
| 9 |
>> devrel has all of these. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> And devrel is the wrong group to handle it, so QA needs to come up with |
| 13 |
> some guidelines. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I tend to agree with Donnie on this partially. Devrel's main focus isn't |
| 16 |
the QA of the tree, its dealing with developers. QA should have the |
| 17 |
authority to limit access to the tree if someone isn't following the |
| 18 |
guidelines properly. They are the ones with the technical know how to |
| 19 |
make the judgment on that. Obviously, they will need to come up with |
| 20 |
guidelines if someone does make a goof up. Give them some probationary |
| 21 |
time, maybe make them take the quiz again to improve their ebuild |
| 22 |
skills. I just don't think devrel is the right place for that kind of |
| 23 |
authority. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I kind of see devrel as the last resort for resolving developer issues. |
| 26 |
If QA has done all it can to help improve someone or deal with their |
| 27 |
problems, then devrel can take over it. Give the power to the right |
| 28 |
people so they can do the right kind of work and decisions. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Lance Albertson <ramereth@g.o> |
| 32 |
Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
--- |
| 35 |
GPG Public Key: <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc> |
| 36 |
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742 |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
ramereth/irc.freenode.net |
Archives