Gentoo Archives: gentoo-qa

From: Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o>
To: gentoo-qa@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-qa] Early elections for new QA lead
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 14:45:04
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-qa] Early elections for new QA lead by Dane Smith
Hash: SHA512

On 24/05/2011 03:01 μμ, Dane Smith wrote:
> On 05/23/11 12:22, Markos Chandras wrote: >> On 21/05/2011 02:03 ¼¼, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: >>> Il giorno sab, 21/05/2011 alle 12.26 +0300, Samuli Suominen ha scritto: >>>> In light of recent events, our current lead has proofen he can't >>>> control >>>> himself in civil manner. It's not a behavior lead should have and >>>> tarnishes the reputation for whole team. >> >>> Let it be on record that the reputation has been tarnished by QA members >>> not following the very policy they are supposed to enforce. >> >>> But fine by me, I candiate me and scarabeus. >> >> 5 days and still no responses. May we should reconsider whether QA is >> actually a "team" or just 4-5 individual members acting on their own? >> >> Regards, > > I am following this issue and the bugs with Samuli and Arfrever etc. I > just don't have anything to say. If we feel elections are necessary, I > will participate. I think I am up to speed on all of what's been going > on enough to voice my opinion intelligently. > > As to whether or not we need elections early, I don't think we do. I > personally consider this entire issue to be a giant pile of nonsense. We > are arguing over ChangeLogs. I can think of so many more important > important issues than that to find solutions to. We also can easily > automate ChangeLog generation etc as long as we want to log everything, > in which case this entire fiasco would be moot. (There are also other > solutions to this set of problems we could consider.) However, at the > moment, the only thing I see is a pissing match over the current policy. > Both sides have technical merits. However, we are creating a very public > scene with all of this, and that is something I down right do not > approve of. When we want to get back to the technical issue itself, I > will gladly voice my opinion. > > I like to think that QA is a decent team of people. I've worked with > most people on the team in the past couple months. Having said that, I > don't think spending an hour or so every month or two making sure > everyone is on the same page would be a bad idea. I also don't think > formalizing some of the procedures etc would be a bad idea. There was > one idea I thought was interesting on bug > comment 51. None the > less, that is all a topic for a separate thread. > > Regards, >
Dane, I am not talking about elections. What I want to say is that QA is not a team. We do not act as team but rather as individuals based on their own will and temper. A team is supposed to have meetings, take team decisions, discuss problems and find solutions that are voted by the majority of the members. Please tell me. Who are the members of QA? Are all the 14 people listed on the web page? Is this really the QA team? Does the current situation reflect reality at all? The way I see it. QA team is actually a group of people with elevated privileges. But definitely not a team. Regards, - -- Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJN28RYAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCyc0P/RnVauLNvPBFWRfsA/xcDwxA kThaBoBbeR+x7vpJxAN3krfYhcUpTaf0Eeu73Vj/Na4+rwK+DXtDyAahlkpnyuf3 BJmhT1mnLlPp3iBq3vkptkBuKHxiRKbv5XBfsgcEkTZLtE9ceYAWmEGMhPmAnRnS kKuigKiiE/vL7NuIUM22fLeX4h010U80wyr9Ozi50gT5yOCjZFhPX8qS4AOaTxIH Bq8Fy/+aLGABeL4/FzQXygmOXuvOagM105jq5g5Kx/0ejBvHrMzCvtRqHY7qByRy JrFW+nVe9xqDNunA8S50DqtrmnHxwfc48nYbNiX7/K7gJFTGLHpuQzyt8xH90V/8 AmFybJFVuGxTQ7onRGABildAOVf3lXRbhK597SkEgZ1Mhq+o2iYpUDW6UapqOzcz PtZwPOO/iBDyzPQvG2yWmiJL5vImLQqlxmXffLSz+AOnVEnAWJDsCBBb3EJEbbXl knkP708olcHIGR/zVi0klDs8jpG+2m1P2w71yMTHTkuIKYKpd6juZFgp+yVoKdzW SSNx8wFDRhAVQ8UAUZCi4sseHtmm2cZVWGoQHN1aj7q0+NRexpbHuZxNGIH8fsqU FubFGlw+XNVXRfPmknMe2IP56gevDddFqlqh/W3d3rnm/L6wkQDgBUtZtDJIKMLj wfxk11dn6pht7hj0+BUn =t1F7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-qa] Early elections for new QA lead Dane Smith <c1pher@g.o>