| 1 |
On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Nick Vinson <nvinson234@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 11/11/2016 04:22 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> This is all about perceptions, not processes. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Great. Whose perception needs changing? Besides the ~5 people |
| 9 |
>> replying in this list? |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>>> Why just have the comrel lead approved by Council why not all comrel |
| 13 |
>>> appointments? |
| 14 |
>>> |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> That really reeks of micromanagement to me. We don't have Council |
| 17 |
>> approve individual appointments in any team currently, and the Comrel |
| 18 |
>> lead already has the power to add/remove anybody from the team as |
| 19 |
>> needed. |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Do you honestly see comrel as being no different than any other project? |
| 23 |
> To my knowledge, no other project has the power to dismiss developers |
| 24 |
> or issue punitive measures. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> If you don't see it as the same, then why compare what Gentoo does or |
| 27 |
> does not do with other projects to how Comrel is handled? |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Of course I think it is different, hence the reason that I argued a |
| 31 |
few years ago that its lead ought to be confirmed by the Council. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Rich |
Archives