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 1FE7lo-0006gy-Ek for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:32:16 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k1SGQGNt009225; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:26:17 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k1SGAx8N014079 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:11:23 GMT Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=home.wh0rd.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FE7KN-0006JX-UO for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:03:56 +0000 Received: (qmail 3045 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2006 11:00:31 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 28 Feb 2006 11:00:31 -0500 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA Team's role Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 11:04:20 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060226222217.GB17257@aerie.halcy0n.com> <20060227163530.687d6ae9@snowdrop.home> <44032D3E.5020500@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <44032D3E.5020500@gentoo.org> GEOMAN: IS A RETARD 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-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200602281104.20270.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 46bdd245-d8b4-4205-9f98-eee2c864a580 X-Archives-Hash: bea38a5d0f363b5d2113b95d71d7bdf3 On Monday 27 February 2006 11:47, Lance Albertson wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:53:20 -0800 Donnie Berkholz > > > > wrote: > > | 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. > > > > So if the maintainer sticks SANDBOX_DISABLE="1" rm -fr / in global scope > > and refuses to move it, QA will have to get council approval to fix it? > > Use some common sense when showing an example please. We all know that > something that stupid needs to be delt with quickly. we've had at least one ebuild do stuff in /tmp in global scope ... of course that was a mistake the dev felt really bad about and it was fixed once noticed, so not sure this is an appropriate example ;) -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list