Alec Warner wrote:
needs as far as QA. Last year Halcy0n petitioned for power for the QA team; it was quite like a ball crushing power (fix it or we will) and it seemed to have all kinds of frictional issues. This being a global issue I would like to hear thoughts on how this could be done better; or we can abandon the idea of a QA team.
I don't recall that it was that heavy handed at all. It said that the QA team would work with maintainers to improve the quality of the tree, and only in *emergency* situations would be empowered to take necessary measures to address the issue. The major point of contention seemed to concern the situation where QA and maintainers strongly disagreed on whether or not a QA problem actually exists and were unable to come to a resolution between themselves. In that case, the issue would be appealed to the council for judgement. Now it also stated that the QA team had veto power over the maintainer until the council can come to a decision. I personally don't agree with this at all, except in the case of security related issues. Even so, I think this falls more under the umbrella of the security team rather than QA.
I do believe the QA team should have the ability to make trivial changes to ebuilds (such as obvious typos and other minor issues), but all effort should probably be made to first discuss these issues with the maintainers themselves. Veto power *needs* to be the absolute last resource, and should very rarely, if ever, be necessary.
--de. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
