1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA512 |
3 |
|
4 |
On 08/14/2011 05:48 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: |
5 |
> Markos Chandras schrieb: |
6 |
>> On 08/14/2011 05:07 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: |
7 |
>>> Markos Chandras schrieb: |
8 |
>>>> On 08/14/2011 02:07 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: |
9 |
>>>>> Markos Chandras schrieb: |
10 |
>>>>>> On 08/14/2011 01:15 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: |
11 |
>>>>>>> Markos Chandras schrieb: |
12 |
>>>>>>>> Hi all, |
13 |
>>>>>>>> |
14 |
>>>>>>>> This is the first of the items I would like to discuss |
15 |
>>>>>>>> for the next Council agenda (or a later one). |
16 |
>>>>>>>> |
17 |
>>>>>>>> Some time ago, few people proposed to have Council |
18 |
>>>>>>>> appointed leaders for QA and DevRel. |
19 |
>>>>>> |
20 |
>>>>>>> My first question: Why is your proposal restricted to QA |
21 |
>>>>>>> and DevRel? |
22 |
>>>>>> |
23 |
>>>>>> Cause I believe these teams are crucial to the continuity |
24 |
>>>>>> of Gentoo project. |
25 |
>>>> |
26 |
>>>>> How do you weight one project against another one? I see it |
27 |
>>>>> the other way round: QA and DevRel are only important, if |
28 |
>>>>> there is some issue not resolved otherwise. But many other |
29 |
>>>>> projects are always important, since they have to maintain |
30 |
>>>>> things continuously. While the council could still decide, if |
31 |
>>>>> DevRel or QA are gone (they just take some workload away), |
32 |
>>>>> you wont be able to get the council to e.g. maintain our |
33 |
>>>>> infrastructure, ebuilds or docs. |
34 |
>>>> |
35 |
>>>> 1) If another project slacks, then bad luck for you. Just mask |
36 |
>>>> and remove the ebuilds ( see recent zope thread ). There is |
37 |
>>>> nothing we can do about that. |
38 |
>> |
39 |
>>> If QA or DevRel slacks, this causes even less work, since they |
40 |
>>> dont even maintain ebuilds to mask and remove. It may result in |
41 |
>>> less QA fixes or less mediation between developers, but in any |
42 |
>>> case, where you need a decision, you could always call for the |
43 |
>>> council. Those projects do just some delegated work, which is of |
44 |
>>> course nice, if it comes to the daily work and also, because it |
45 |
>>> reduces the work, that needs to be done by the council. But |
46 |
>>> neither is unreplaceable and the decisions of both teams can |
47 |
>>> already be checked by the council, so i see no real requirement |
48 |
>>> for additional bureaucracy for those 2 specific teams. |
49 |
>> |
50 |
>> I am not talking ajust about decisions. If QA slacks then will |
51 |
>> then Council step up and maintain the QA in the portage? If devrel |
52 |
>> slacks then will the Council do all the recruitment/retirement? |
53 |
>> These projects are vital for the project. I don't know how to |
54 |
>> explain that in more details. |
55 |
> |
56 |
> Every developer is responsible for the QA of the packages he |
57 |
> maintains. There are of course some mistakes happening and sometimes |
58 |
> someone does something wrong (intentionally or not), but if there is |
59 |
> no active QA team, this just means, that the users will hit those |
60 |
> issues and report them. |
61 |
Again, all the problems are not the same. There is a vertical |
62 |
relationship in this case as well. Sometimes, you need an active QA to |
63 |
fix a problem before it hits users (remember recent case with broken |
64 |
python + portage ) |
65 |
|
66 |
> this is not the best way, it still does not mean the end of Gentoo. |
67 |
Well, driving users away is not a good thing either. If you constantly |
68 |
break things they will go away sooner or later. We have already lost a |
69 |
great amount of our former user base and we keep loosing more and more. |
70 |
The numbers of those who are leaving are certainly more than those who |
71 |
are joining. |
72 |
|
73 |
>>>> 2) Infrastructure is a sensitive team, and does not deal with |
74 |
>>>> ebuild maintenance and portage directly. |
75 |
>> |
76 |
>>> And if infra slacks? Bad luck for you, just mask and remove the |
77 |
>>> hardware? :-) |
78 |
>> Like I said, this is not related to portage QA. I only care about |
79 |
>> the /usr/portage/* parts and what users see from "outside" |
80 |
> |
81 |
> If the master rsync server refuses to run, this will have an impact |
82 |
> at what users see from "outside" ;-) |
83 |
> |
84 |
Infra is in a good state so I don't really understand why do we need to |
85 |
deal with this at the moment. |
86 |
|
87 |
> [SNIP] |
88 |
>> |
89 |
>>> Maybe you should first tell me, how you define activity for QA |
90 |
>>> (and DevRel)? |
91 |
>> Ok, and active QA team is a team that fixes severe and other QA |
92 |
>> problems within 24 hours. Moreover, an active QA team should be |
93 |
>> there 24/7 for someone who needs an advice for them or needs to |
94 |
>> complain about a developer that broke portage. If QA was active the |
95 |
>> breakages from Arfrever's commits would have been spotted months |
96 |
>> before a severe incident occurs. |
97 |
> |
98 |
> If your requirement for active QA is that high, i have to tell you, |
99 |
> that practially you will never get the needed manpower together to |
100 |
> meet those requirements. |
101 |
> |
102 |
> |
103 |
I have high requirement ( which are non-realistic ) so even if we |
104 |
achieve 50% of them would be good enough. |
105 |
|
106 |
|
107 |
- -- |
108 |
Regards, |
109 |
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 |
110 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
111 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) |
112 |
|
113 |
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJOR/4oAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCjJ8QAIhptFdOzt1Tk3KiBMvJX8Tv |
114 |
kiF7JvHc1kVvUF2DpVKiwTYar6ChF32ZqSTUjEu4Lzm9eBRljVPkRejNwYUlpt7d |
115 |
gApKTasSXwMKM8nVQUVjf/wTpeY+ANOl6bL9tK4EBPDjWkx94ttWa/TvfhOLdb7T |
116 |
w8xg3suaT5JMMlT+igDT84yay+NSxfrkwqRieFp04rr9ZUrKOiX/OwXT91Wa4BnK |
117 |
QL1eXgeNNXhLC/Ok/0YySeOWKdhm/wb81aixhmp0eI8CZTQSCuDKf6sQza0VEjJl |
118 |
hDhH4k9qIbjvUyEC1igcBCIgSIxjf413/39FCYEj9R5QtgwA/7Sdg3NS72mNPxgl |
119 |
omX6KQEAGE64pTYVDvj4B1EZKsInl74t810gPIgESAcxqZm2CFBd4zi2LelMHE4J |
120 |
uJccMgt9AFdX3bjEG5+qqM9RvaRzQH48JqmgYUC9zeRiM6CWzf8VCx1knZWdEv35 |
121 |
3saJVHIesdHyXUgyU/NU/uEPhI98pGOA6k42DY3GHO2iGY5k9d4vzHmNcjJeBlTn |
122 |
1Zr+6IDVMil8TENImFUJk3GKYY/1ygc2NiU7HxmZ1OvGhW6iV8VWgsyK+C3KgFvL |
123 |
DKbZ3C3mGH71BCf8WcIZsIwDr0IPIDr3wLU679MHBZPAB+zmoin+4/+dYgxIru7E |
124 |
07TI6oyVCgmYANX36do/ |
125 |
=v6xx |
126 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |