Re: [gentoo-project] Fwd: [gentoo-dev] rfc: formally allow qa to suspend commit rights

[William Hubbs]

On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 08:16:24AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:15 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
> >
> > I think that the current version is just fine. QA should take care of
> > the tree, and any developer issues should be handled by Comrel.
> >
>
> Tend to agree.  Are there situations where the current policy has been
> inadequate?  I am fine with giving QA teeth, but if they effectively
> have them already it isn't so much of a problem.
 
I don't see this as giving QA any "teeth" they don't have already. In
the past, QA has directly requested infra to suspend commit rights for
developers,  and I am just saying I think we should go ahead and put it
in the GLEP so everyone knows it is possible and how it can be done.

> If we do make a change I suggest changing:
> +* Any QA team lead decision can be revoked by major opposing vote
> from all current QA members. Given the nature of this action new
> elections should be held within 1 month to elect a new QA team lead.
>
> I think there are better ways of dealing with an out-of-control QA
> lead.  First, Council should just be able to remove them if this is
> the case.  Second, Council did confirm the QA lead, and the Council
> didn't confirm any of the other QA members, so in the event of a
> disagreement do we really want to back the others?  Third, if the QA
> lead can add/remove members from the team at-will, then they really
> aren't any kind of independent check on authority.  I think it is
> healthier if the team works more like a team and less like a
> self-oversight board, and in the truly exceptional case where
> oversight is needed, well, we have the Council already.

Here  is an updated patch that removes that clause and fixes a typo.

What do you think?

William