| 1 |
Jon Portnoy wrote: [Tue Sep 13 2005, 11:22:32AM CDT] |
| 2 |
> > |
| 3 |
> > The actual powers/role of devrel has always been a grey area. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> No it hasn't, unless by 'gray area' you mean 'a few people who don't |
| 6 |
> like devrel claim it shouldn't be able to do anything because drobbins |
| 7 |
> set it up' |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Recruitment, conflict resolution, disciplinary issues. I.e., 'managing |
| 10 |
> developers.' |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I'm not sure that's entirely correct. I seem to remember at least one |
| 13 |
devrel dev stating that when it comes to devs who violate technical |
| 14 |
policies (not using repoman, repeatedly breaking sections of the tree, |
| 15 |
etcetera) that enforcement should be left up to the appropriate |
| 16 |
managers, not devrel. The argument was that devrel devs are often not |
| 17 |
experts in the technical aspects, so it's hard for them to adjudicate |
| 18 |
effectively. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Of course, I could be entirely mistaken, but I know that I'm not the |
| 21 |
only person who has this impression. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-g2boojum- |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Grant Goodyear |
| 26 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 27 |
g2boojum@g.o |
| 28 |
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum |
| 29 |
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 |
Archives