Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [PATCH] glep-0048: Provide clear rules for disciplinary actions
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 09:17:04
Message-Id: 20190429111653.07880dca@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] [PATCH] glep-0048: Provide clear rules for disciplinary actions by Mikle Kolyada
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA256
3
4 On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 22:06:36 +0300
5 Mikle Kolyada <zlogene@g.o> wrote:
6
7 >
8 >
9 > On 26.04.2019 17:29, Alexis Ballier wrote:
10 > > On Fri, 12 Apr 2019 18:25:57 +0200
11 > > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
12 > >
13 > > > Why do you
14 > > > presume that ComRel will never abuse its power, and at the same
15 > > > time presume QA will kick people 'on a whim'?
16 > >
17 > > comrel does not create any rule. QA does. That's called separation
18 > > of powers.
19 > If I understood you correctly, this is not particularly true. ComRel
20 > changes its policy (because it belongs to ComRel, this is actually how
21 > the proctors project was launched again), at the meantime QA changes
22 > its policy, because GLEP48 is about QA.
23 > The main difference is that ComRel does not have the GLEP describing
24 > its duties, and that is why these changes attract less attention.
25 >
26
27
28 What I meant is that being judge and party (what this QA change is
29 about) is a highway to abuses. This does not prevent all of them, but I
30 believe having them separate is a very important barrier.
31 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
32
33 iHUEAREIAB0WIQSpOxaxaZikKNVNlsYOJUi7xgflrgUCXMbBBQAKCRAOJUi7xgfl
34 riHKAPwJt8ogc74iU1O/D2TqL34WnruZBlwekMPzD/My6mwQ9QD8CpnJq5oxUSt0
35 RRTtSG364yGbzHk5bdUISnGL0eQ1rZg=
36 =CXJ/
37 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----