On 06/20/2013 05:53 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > Does this mean the QA lead finally gets to suspend people who are > patently not suited for developing a stable distribution without > asking devrel? Because last time we got into the same judge, jury, > and executioner argument, which I guess was just sent for the gallows > (pun intended).
I'm not against that, but I prefer setting some fast track involving at most 3 people and some procedure also for it. E.g. : you can ask for 6h suspension on direct request and by contacting a single devrel person to get an 1week suspension within 2 days. > Mind, it's not like I disagree with at least one of the actions that > you took recently, but given your surge approach I would like to > point out that is not your task judging code quality, and yes that > does make me uncomfortable, that you want to pick up the full power > at once, and not collaborate with whom should have been involved in > the process. As said, this whole thing is just an interim solution till fast-path procedures get deployed. lu
