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 1EFJtE-0000Nc-Uv for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:08:37 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8DN3Hq9004477; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:03:17 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 j8DN1YVZ009275 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:01:34 GMT Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=home.wh0rd.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EFJqt-000460-Se for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:06:12 +0000 Received: (qmail 13284 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2005 19:03:05 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 13 Sep 2005 19:03:05 -0400 From: Mike Frysinger 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 19:06:08 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <4325D12A.5050601@gentoo.org> <200509131702.45512.vapier@gentoo.org> <43275620.3060501@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <43275620.3060501@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail 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: <200509131906.08912.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 7eae15b5-04e9-42e8-a53c-ae65d43e7d98 X-Archives-Hash: ba4516c6d195d80505b0db8e0d4ed3ea On Tuesday 13 September 2005 06:43 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: > > QA team identifies a misbehaving dev who refuses to change and then hands > > off the name/relevant data to devrel ... QA team then is pretty much done > > with the issue and the rest is up to devrel to resolve > > I disagree that devrel should be involved. I think QA should hand off > directly to infra, who can deactivate accounts. so your previous off-topic comment about redtape in devrel processes was irrelevant :P at any rate, you're proposing giving the control to the QA team which has no guidelines or processes outlined, let alone the manpower. devrel has all of these. -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list