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 4.54) id 1FDXug-0007vr-Rs for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 02:15:03 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k1R2Dvrr019046; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 02:13:57 GMT Received: from aerie.halcy0n.com ([65.98.89.194]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k1R2Ad8f015148 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 02:10:39 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aerie.halcy0n.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 774977E887 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:10:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from aerie.halcy0n.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (halcy0n.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 27814-01-6 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:10:38 -0500 (EST) Received: by aerie.halcy0n.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 08B657E9FB; Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:10:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:10:37 -0500 From: Mark Loeser To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA Team's role Message-ID: <20060227021037.GH17257@aerie.halcy0n.com> References: <20060226222217.GB17257@aerie.halcy0n.com> <20060226231121.GB11930@dogmatix.willow.local> <20060226232147.37349bc2@snowdrop.home> <20060226233558.GD11930@dogmatix.willow.local> <20060227000929.GC17257@aerie.halcy0n.com> <440247DE.5010902@gentoo.org> <20060227003541.GF17257@aerie.halcy0n.com> <44025B90.3080208@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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="82evfD9Ogz2JrdWZ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44025B90.3080208@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at halcy0n.com X-Archives-Salt: ea066d7d-cc04-4c71-9d54-f2c085bc7305 X-Archives-Hash: 53d9d942a594f7277f033e05f0f37665 --82evfD9Ogz2JrdWZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Donnie Berkholz said: > No, it's the exact opposite of what you're saying. You want to commit > first and let the maintainer bring it to the council. I'm saying the > maintainer has the right to have any non-security commit to his/her > package reverted pending a decision. Yea, I realize now I read it wrong :) > The maintainer should be the absolute authority over his/her packages, > and only the council should be able to overrule maintainer decisions in > the case of disagreement between the maintainer and anybody else. I think it really depends on the situation, but in general I disagree that something should be left in a state that the QA team finds questionable/broken. It should be a very rare occurence that this comes up, since we don't really want to override what the maintainer says, but I think the QA team should have this right in extreme circumstances. --=20 Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86) email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ http://www.halcy0n.com --82evfD9Ogz2JrdWZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEAl+dCRZPokWLroQRAnHMAKCgQAsdG13bRmYe82uvbxIzJA1uiQCgtJ87 5k/zvPKmOFdWiL1X1/+OGfw= =m/ij -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --82evfD9Ogz2JrdWZ-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list