| 1 |
Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> said: |
| 2 |
> * Just because breaking policy breaks a QA tool, but is guaranteed to |
| 3 |
> never break itself (formatting policy, like space vs. tab etc.) does not |
| 4 |
> increase the severity of the breakage. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I had hoped something like this would have just been understood to not |
| 7 |
be too severe, since it doesn't really break anything but coding standards. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> * Before any enforcement is possible, QA must establish a well supported |
| 10 |
> (debated on dev-) exception policy. While it were nice if exceptions are |
| 11 |
> not needed, reality is that they can not be avoided. Therefore there |
| 12 |
> must be an exception policy. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I'm not sure what you mean here. You mean for each instance? In |
| 15 |
general? In general can be difficult since it leaves a lot of things up |
| 16 |
for interpretation. For each instance, 99% of the time an acceptable |
| 17 |
interim solution should be able to be achieved between the QA team and |
| 18 |
the maintainer. In situations where we can't figure out how to best |
| 19 |
address the situation, opening the discussion up to -dev may help, but |
| 20 |
in the end it should come down to an agreement between the maintainer |
| 21 |
and the team. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86) |
| 25 |
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org |
| 26 |
mark AT halcy0n DOT com |
| 27 |
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ |
| 28 |
http://www.halcy0n.com |
Archives