From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD53138845 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 21:03:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8D0D8E1197; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 21:03:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92DB0E1192 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 21:03:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.22] (p4FCFD76A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.207.215.106]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tommy) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 97EE733FA01 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 21:03:34 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52DEE09A.5020608@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 22:03:22 +0100 From: Thomas Sachau User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:26.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/26.0 SeaMonkey/2.23 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: formally allow qa to suspend commit rights References: <20140119050224.GA7898@laptop.home> <20140120035446.063a31be@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <52DD2E2A.2020303@gmail.com> <20140121155616.6a8cdf9b@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140121175657.9455.qmail@stuge.se> <20140121191154.10d9bd28@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140121181654.11052.qmail@stuge.se> <20140121201855.4c81826c@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <20140121201855.4c81826c@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 OpenPGP: id=211CA2D4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cN2fcVq1wOKx8Aenodjhd35O9tQfdDINc" X-Archives-Salt: 765723fd-e877-454c-8f40-f30b1f5ce5cf X-Archives-Hash: 866d23900d25b53f6c28c56667cd1a94 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --cN2fcVq1wOKx8Aenodjhd35O9tQfdDINc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tom Wijsman schrieb: >=20 > [1]: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GLEP:48 >=20 > "In the event that a developer still insists that a package does > not break QA standards, an appeal can be made at the next council= > meeting. The package should be dealt with per QA's request until > such a time that a decision is made by the council." >=20 Thanks for this pointer, i guess this makes the existing situation pretty clear: If QA does a commit and a dev does disagree, he can discuss it with QA or ask for council decision, but should never revert this QA change on his own. So if the dev then does ignore this rule, he does not follow our written rules (problem with the behaviour) and as a result this becomes a case for comrel. Now if comrel cannot convince the dev to accept the QA change (at least until council decision), it means comrel would have to take disciplinary action (e.g. commit access removal). With this in mind, i currently dont see any case where QA would need the ability to remove the commit access of a dev, so i dont see a need for this glep update. --=20 Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer --cN2fcVq1wOKx8Aenodjhd35O9tQfdDINc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SeaMonkey - http://www.enigmail.net/ iJwEAQECAAYFAlLe4KEACgkQG7kqcTWJkGfJLgP/VFcd6zejireo1fOb1mTYFtb0 kIGS5qnNeZdgklKKEJTJF8wqcGuD+8z+GScnl2IDe8NBINGC4J43u/LFTR2Xc50s nSK2JelUHGGmbLLUb3XY+JSgxrFUGS6KMpOphBG6EV1MR7xRaWzab/xY7cqCJ0bh Kd2YKIO3bDwO35IZ6QU= =Mo7o -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --cN2fcVq1wOKx8Aenodjhd35O9tQfdDINc--