| 1 |
On 11/13/2016 02:30 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 13/11/16 01:28, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 8:25 PM, M. J. Everitt <m.j.everitt@×××.org> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On 13/11/16 01:22, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> On 11/13/2016 02:21 AM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 6 |
>>>>> On Friday, November 11, 2016 7:22:19 PM EST Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 7 |
>>>>>> That really reeks of micromanagement to me. We don't have Council |
| 8 |
>>>>>> approve individual appointments in any team currently, and the Comrel |
| 9 |
>>>>>> lead already has the power to add/remove anybody from the team as |
| 10 |
>>>>>> needed. |
| 11 |
>>>>> No other project in Gentoo is controlled like that. Any developer can join any |
| 12 |
>>>>> team without approval. It is not right that Comrel get's to choose who gets to |
| 13 |
>>>>> be part of Comrel. Also that Comrel can remove members from that team/project. |
| 14 |
>>>>> |
| 15 |
>>>> " The QA team lead must approve developers who would like to join the |
| 16 |
>>>> project. The applicant must demonstrate a thorough understanding of the |
| 17 |
>>>> duties he would like to perform. By accepting the applicant the QA team |
| 18 |
>>>> lead will accept the responsibility to direct them as part of the team |
| 19 |
>>>> and will be held responsible for any action the team member takes on |
| 20 |
>>>> behalf of the QA team." |
| 21 |
>>>> |
| 22 |
>>>> |
| 23 |
>>> ^^ This sounds like a perfectly workable equivalent that could be |
| 24 |
>>> applied to Comrel .. thoughts?? |
| 25 |
>>> |
| 26 |
>> That seems to be the general thinking right now. Back when these |
| 27 |
>> changes were made to QA it was generally discussed that at some point |
| 28 |
>> it probably wouldn't hurt to apply these to Comrel, and possibly Infra |
| 29 |
>> as well. |
| 30 |
>> |
| 31 |
> The only remaining caveat is how the lead is selected/elected .. but I |
| 32 |
> think we're making some progress on a change of process to that end, right? |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> Pulling in K_F's comments .. there have been a few random attempts at a |
| 35 |
> GLEP for ComRel .. I'm not sure what state any of them are in ... |
| 36 |
> working group maybe? |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
I haven't taken an active stance for comrel GLEP, but the security one |
| 39 |
is in early draft form at |
| 40 |
http://git.sumptuouscapital.com/?p=gentoo/gentoo-security-glep.git;a=blob;f=glep.txt |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
the comrel gelp should come from the project itself, but having specific |
| 43 |
responsibilities defined is only a good thing. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
Kristian Fiskerstrand |
| 48 |
OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net |
| 49 |
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 |
Archives