Currently, to the best of my understanding, QA policies are spelt out
scattered amongst the devmanual.


This makes it very hard to:
- Know what policies are in place
- Know how to conform to each policy
- Cite a given policy
- Interpret a given policy unambiguously.

Most of the dev-manual is written in the context of "If problem/task X
-> do Y"

But that doesn't really help for policy documentation.

For policies to be effective, I feel we need something more like a list
of policies, with numerical identifiers, with a short description of
the policy (Similar to a GLEP title), which links to a document
outlining what that policy means in detail.

ie:

 [P-0001] Non-maintainer commits
 [P-0002] Maintainer assignment

etc.

Policies that are no longer "current" could be retained, but marked
"inactive" ( meaning that the policy is no longer in effect, with the
potential for a policy to be reinstated ), or policies could be marked
as "tentative", where they're in semi-draft status and are trending
towards enforcement.

The hope here is that when a policy is violated, a clear citation can
be made for which policy was violated.

As it stands, it seems to be more like "read the whole dev manual
again", "try googling the dev manual and get lucky", and sometimes
"wring your hands over what the dev manual might say", or "ask QA to
tell you what the policies are".

None of these are ideal.