Re: [gentoo-dev] QA Roles v2

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thursday 02 March 2006 04:01, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> * There is no proposal for a process to formulate, and gain wide
> approval for new QA standards.  This week, there's been an example of
> the QA team documenting a QA standard *after* a bug was raised about a
> QA violation ... and then that document being used as if that
> particular QA standard had always been in the document.

i chatted on irc with a few peeps about this and here's what has been rolling 
around in my noggin ...

we're going to have two documents of sorts ... the balls-to-the-wall 
happy-to-be-hardcore nothing-more-official-than-this devrel document ... and 
then we're going to have the stop-cant-stop-my-feet QA guidelines which is 
quite dynamic and meant to outline what the QA team is looking for at any 
particular point in time

to get into the QA guidelines, you go through the QA team ... to get into the 
devrel document, you go through the devrel doc maintainers.  to increase 
visibility here, i think that all significant changes to policy that are 
Incorporated into the devrel handbook should have a notice sent to the gentoo 
dev mailing list first.  thus if people strongly object, we can resolve those 
differences without having people upset when something they disagree with and 
have never heard of is thrown in their FACE.  as for the QA document, there 
is a QA list where notifications/changes can be sent.  then over time we can 
move relevant pieces of the QA document into the devrel document.
-mike

-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list