On 05/24/2011 04:54 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > Dne 21.5.2011 15:03, Diego Elio Pettenò napsal(a): >> 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. > > Ok, if you guys want new elections lets do it properly :) > > I propose this timetable: > 27.5. Nominations close - We have the list, new thread is started > 3.6. Voting close - New lead selected > > Voting will happen over this ML where there will be new mail thread > containing names of all candidates to which each developer is supposed > to reply. > > Where QA team size will be determined based on people who bothered to > vote. If a member decide not to vote he will be removed from the QA team > for inactivity (something like mandatory voting). > > And also i accept the nomination. > > Tomas
Still the same as last time, Diego. The bug didn't change my mind. I like both of you guys and also I kinda understand both of you, I like your work etc. but I also still think that Diego is a good QA lead. I simply excluded the bug of my mind for this vote. So the current situation (positions/people) are still fine to me. -- Regards, Christian Ruppert Role: Gentoo Linux developer, Bugzilla administrator and Infrastructure member Fingerprint: EEB1 C341 7C84 B274 6C59 F243 5EAB 0C62 B427 ABC8
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
