Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Mikle Kolyada <zlogene@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [PATCH] glep-0048: Provide clear rules for disciplinary actions
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 19:07:00
Message-Id: 0a3d7c73-9cf5-303c-8b8f-55c1e067cbb8@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] [PATCH] glep-0048: Provide clear rules for disciplinary actions by Alexis Ballier
1 On 26.04.2019 17:29, Alexis Ballier wrote:
2 > On Fri, 12 Apr 2019 18:25:57 +0200
3 > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
4 >
5 > > Why do you
6 > > presume that ComRel will never abuse its power, and at the same time
7 > > presume QA will kick people 'on a whim'?
8 >
9 > comrel does not create any rule. QA does. That's called separation of
10 > powers.
11 If I understood you correctly, this is not particularly true. ComRel
12 changes its policy (because it belongs to ComRel, this is actually how
13 the proctors project was launched again), at the meantime QA changes its
14 policy, because GLEP48 is about QA.
15 The main difference is that ComRel does not have the GLEP describing its
16 duties, and that is why these changes attract less attention.

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies