Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] OT - Tinderbox question
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 13:51:56
Message-Id: CAGfcS_me70pY+s0mBUZCbFq2v0Lf9i2F4wT9uUXzVNg6NxFz+g@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] OT - Tinderbox question by Samuli Suominen
1 On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote:
2 >
3 > On 15/05/14 20:17, Rich Freeman wrote:
4 >> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 7:21 AM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote:
5 >>> Sergey Popov:
6 >>>> And yes, we need tinderbox. But, c'mon. stop talking loudly on ML and
7 >>>> get things done if you can.
8 >>>>
9 >>> This is like working on patches while upstream already said "not
10 >>> interested".
11 >>>
12 >>> Since QA doesn't think it's their job to run a tinderbox, I will work
13 >>> with those people who actually care about it, instead of QA.
14 >> Perhaps you should let QA speak for what it thinks its job is? Note
15 >> that random posts in random bugs by random members of QA isn't the
16 >> same as QA saying something.
17 >
18 > Except it is, that's what QA just voted in their own meeting,
19 > one QA member represents the whole team.
20
21 I suspect the intent of their vote was that QA members could take
22 action individually in the name of QA. That doesn't necessarily mean
23 that every time you sneeze and a QA member says "God bless you" that
24 QA is making an official proclamation on the Gentoo state religion.
25
26 The QA team is a bit immature, but it is good practice to be explicit
27 when you're speaking on behalf of an official role. I'm on the
28 Council, but nothing I'm posting in this email represents the opinion
29 of the Council, and beyond general code of conduct nobody is going to
30 get in trouble for ignoring it. On the other hand, I just posted the
31 official summary of the last Council meeting and everybody should
32 assume by default that it DOES represent the opinion of the Council
33 and is enforceable. That doesn't mean that somebody couldn't point
34 out a mistake and have it corrected, but it should be viewed as having
35 a place of authority. However, when I'm posting random emails to the
36 lists, they should be viewed as my own personal opinion whether I
37 state so or not, especially since we tend to appoint roles like
38 QA/Comrel/Council/etc out of our active developer body and we don't
39 hire full-time professionals who only do those roles.
40
41 So, maybe what QA voted on was a bit sloppy, but if we want every
42 Gentoo policy to be absolutely without ambiguity or loophole than I'll
43 find something better to do with my time. I'm personally convinced
44 that writing perfect laws to govern human behavior makes writing
45 perfect software seem almost trivial in comparison.
46
47 Rich

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] OT - Tinderbox question Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o>