From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EFF5U-0000o8-S1
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:00:57 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8DHthTY028474;
	Tue, 13 Sep 2005 17:55:43 GMT
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8DHs4SD008485
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 17:54:05 GMT
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=home.wh0rd.org)
	by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EFF3H-0004AH-NP
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 17:58:40 +0000
Received: (qmail 2490 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2005 13:55:41 -0400
Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2)
  by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 13 Sep 2005 13:55:41 -0400
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Organization: wh0rd.org
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council meeting, Thursday 15th, 1900 UTC
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:58:41 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2
References: <4325D12A.5050601@gentoo.org> <20050913162232.GA18592@cerberus.oppresses.us> <20050913180910.1012fb27@snowdrop.home>
In-Reply-To: <20050913180910.1012fb27@snowdrop.home>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200509131358.41822.vapier@gentoo.org>
X-Archives-Salt: 355e78e3-8ab1-4f88-99f5-a083494e71c1
X-Archives-Hash: e534774404676a8e7c5ffaa81ed2c240

On Tuesday 13 September 2005 01:09 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 12:22:32 -0400 Jon Portnoy <avenj@gentoo.org> wrote:
> | On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 07:33:59AM -0500, Lance Albertson wrote:
> | > The actual powers/role of devrel has always been a grey area.
> |
> | No it hasn't, unless by 'gray area' you mean 'a few people who don't
> | like devrel claim it shouldn't be able to do anything because
> | drobbins set it up'
> |
> | Recruitment, conflict resolution, disciplinary issues. I.e.,
> | 'managing developers.'
>
> * devrel doesn't do "broke the tree" enforcement, that's QA's job
> * devrel doesn't do "broke the tree" enforcement, that's the council's
> job
> * devrel doesn't do "broke the tree" enforcement, that's the
> management's job
> * devrel are the only people who do enforcement, and that they decide
> when they do it
> * devrel are the only people who do enforcement, and that they need to
> be told by QA when they need to do something
> * devrel are the only people who do enforcement, and that they need to
> be told by a manager when they need to do something

ive heard some of these ... personally i see it as:
- the council puts policies/guidelines/etc into effect based on developer 
community
- QA team uses these policies/guidelines/etc to validate Gentoo and makes 
other developers aware of their mistakes in a friendly manner
- in the case of developers who do not wish to follow accepted 
policies/guidelines/etc even after being enlightened, devrel is notified and 
takes appropriate corrective action

the idea of course is that policies/guidelines/etc dont come out of nowhere as 
they should be generally accepted before they are instituted
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list