Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: formally allow qa to suspend commit rights

[hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/20/2014 03:09 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 01/20/14 15:59, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org>
>> wrote:
>>> #gentoo-qa | @hwoarang: pretty sure diego had the powerzz to
>>> suspend people
>>> 
>>> Whether this has actually happened is something that is
>>> questionable;
>> 
>> Not that this necessarily needs to make it into the GLEP, and
>> I'm still on the fence regarding whether we really need to make
>> this change at all, but things like access suspensions and other 
>> administrative/disciplinary procedures should be documented.  I
>> think whether this is a matter of public record or not is open to
>> debate, but I don't like the fact that we can really say for sure
>> when/if this has actually happened.
> 
> 
> Speaking as someone who had this power in his day job, for QA to be
> able to suspend accounts is a very bad idea indeed. It always ends
> badly. I suspended 20+ accounts in my current job over the years
> and the number of cases where it was the right thing to do is
> precisely 0.
> 
> It was always a case of ill-advised action taken out of
> frustration, or bypass the training step, or don't try hard enough
> to reach the "infringer" and communicate like grown adults. Yup, I
> did all three.
> 
> Suspending an account is a very serious thing to undertake, the
> effects on the suspended person are vast and this power should
> never lie with the person who is feeling the pain. Instead, there
> are well established channels to the body who can make the
> decision. If QA has a problem with a dev for any reason whatsoever,
> then QA should make a well-thought out case to that other body for
> decision. Anything else is madness and open invitation for it to
> all go south.
> 
> 

Yep. This proposal is actually another workaround that emerges,
because people do not communicate and ignore each other. This is a
common habit in the gentoo dev community and it seems we have accepted
that fact.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS3wDWAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzPYYH/A87fN34q1ShBhPvIh2uqP1K
UogA7se08pol0abNpDenYM2qDcTxYWXRPgYS7xXcrjh1bbhDmI+/0zuW7vd8/AWh
V20TffIkMHr1hMWyFKysFD6VKZC8DYr8fCGkgEfTRAjv1mdGFvfX+k1cqUZ+VtKB
bNPiH5Op7EOqpBp/5oz/CmGNFB8nPPEsDRrUbkE/hBPO3JfufBVHdDnmgJg9s0Og
Yd5dS55wQTTX7mbLDL4LePDF5pEtM9LnGc2uLgvDrepyX0Z2rio8aNnn/UI0IrY2
p7gkpMK9aA8vSixuvz3qpQbDs0julAswv5ZjTNgu237nukp1yiJGcAwjCDrCRl0=
=HdSb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----