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 1FE9lQ-0004ip-Tu for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 18:40:01 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k1SIblMG019216; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 18:37:47 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 k1SIYQWq016435 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 18:34:26 GMT Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=home.wh0rd.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FE9gq-0005YG-Vc for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 18:35:17 +0000 Received: (qmail 22381 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2006 13:31:50 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 28 Feb 2006 13:31:50 -0500 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policies (was: [RFC] QA Team's role) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 13:35:41 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060226222217.GB17257@aerie.halcy0n.com> <44047935.2050901@gentoo.org> <1925049850.20060228173945@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <1925049850.20060228173945@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: <200602281335.41348.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 370c4f70-b1b4-4df3-8dd4-e6543df88810 X-Archives-Hash: cadd26059c1bccc877754f53923540ae On Tuesday 28 February 2006 11:39, Jakub Moc wrote: > 28.2.2006, 17:24:21, Danny van Dyk wrote: > > If you don't agree with the contents, why didn't you raise your > > opposition earlier? > > I don't feel any need to raise opposition against some unofficial manual, > what would be the point in that? I'm raising my hand against silently > incorporating parts of it (that affect a lot of stuff in the tree) into > official docs without a proper discussion, even more so that they are being > claimed as an official QA policy now. Documents located in private devspace > of some devs are non-official and noone checks their contents for > correctness, they are private activity of those devs. input was solicited from the developer community before about ciaranm's unofficial manual with notes that the plan was to incorporate it piece by piece into the official dev handbook -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list