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 1FDZBd-000856-Rm for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:36:38 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k1R3ZmjH027886; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:35:49 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 k1R3Xe6o017942 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:33:40 GMT Received: from c-67-171-150-177.hsd1.or.comcast.net ([67.171.150.177] helo=[192.168.1.106]) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54) id 1FDZ8m-0000Zi-6p for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:33:40 +0000 Message-ID: <4402732A.6050707@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:34:02 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz User-Agent: Mail/News 1.5 (X11/20060208) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA Team's role 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> <20060227021037.GH17257@aerie.halcy0n.com> In-Reply-To: <20060227021037.GH17257@aerie.halcy0n.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig9835502DB724917F550E8257" X-Archives-Salt: 1acaded3-478c-4fee-b602-d7025f783309 X-Archives-Hash: 4ef1e1763913d1e14f721a46e7280100 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig9835502DB724917F550E8257 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mark Loeser wrote: > Donnie Berkholz said: >> The maintainer should be the absolute authority over his/her packages,= >> and only the council should be able to overrule maintainer decisions i= n >> the case of disagreement between the maintainer and anybody else. >=20 > 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 come= s > up, since we don't really want to override what the maintainer says, bu= t > I think the QA team should have this right in extreme circumstances. So if QA thinks one way is right, and the package maintainer thinks another way is right, you say QA always trumps? I'm looking at this as "innocent until proven guilty" versus "guilty until proven innocent." When parties are in disagreement, the _current_ situation should stand until the council (or the two groups in question) resolves it. That assumes lack of extenuating circumstances such as security vulnerabilities or major tree breakage. Thanks, Donnie --------------enig9835502DB724917F550E8257 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEAnMsXVaO67S1rtsRApsFAKDB/Ufh9bkc6ARr4ozOo4j6DxUWeACggHw9 DfBXUEgsvre5zpFopMexN/Q= =Mrws -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig9835502DB724917F550E8257-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list