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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GJfb0-0005Xz-P9 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2006 00:12:19 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k830BZnx011621; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 00:11:35 GMT Received: from egr.msu.edu (jeeves.egr.msu.edu [35.9.37.127]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k8309WO0016408 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 00:09:32 GMT Received: from [35.11.210.66] (warnera6.user.msu.edu [35.11.210.66]) (authenticated bits=0) by egr.msu.edu (8.13.7/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k8309W7c009302 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2006 20:09:32 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <44FA1D6E.5040703@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2006 20:10:22 -0400 From: Alec Warner Organization: Gentoo User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060612) 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] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for September References: <20060901095047.2EEE3648F4@smtp.gentoo.org> <20060902000853.GM32359@curie-int.orbis-terrarum.net> <1157141499.7064.10.camel@edge> In-Reply-To: <1157141499.7064.10.camel@edge> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 OpenPGP: id=51C1BC98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 2bf03b0e-2a73-4c92-81ba-c1a2297d2025 X-Archives-Hash: 5d8860ef6e901ddf981be55956e1528e Daniel Ostrow wrote: > On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 17:08 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 05:51:07AM +0000, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>> This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the >>> 2nd Thursday once a month), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @ >>> irc.freenode.net) ! >> Is this the new council for which the voting should have just ended, or >> the old council? > > Polls for the council close at 00:00 UTC September 11th, they didn't > open on Aug 1st. As such it will be three days after the polls close so > it should be the inaugural meeting of the new council. > > --Dan I wish to add the agenda item, "what kind of QA does gentoo need, and what kind of QA will gentoo support." Our current QA team doesn't do much; the tools are lacking in many areas. Does the community as a whole really care about all these (minor) violations? Can I as a member of QA just go through and fix them? Along with this somewhat is package "ownership." I agree that the maintainer has final say in many areas related to their package (or set of packages) but breaking QA perhaps shouldn't be one of them; or should it? Does our current QA policy fail in light of portage's failings (see glep 42, requests for post_src_depend() action where we detect problems in use flags prior to merging, USE/SLOT deps ). Should our QA policy evolve? I also wish to bring up the games team in this regard as generally the QA team ignores anything games-*. This comment is not meant to bash the games team (imho they do an utterly awesome job on almost all of their stuff); they just happen to violate qa rules doing so ;P This agenda point is not a "hard point" more-so I seek the council's recommendation on what you (being the elected council) think Gentoo needs as far as QA. Last year Halcy0n petitioned for power for the QA team; it was quite like a ball crushing power (fix it or we will) and it seemed to have all kinds of frictional issues. This being a global issue I would like to hear thoughts on how this could be done better; or we can abandon the idea of a QA team. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list