* Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: formally allow qa to suspend commit rights
@ 2014-01-21 17:50 99% ` Rich Freeman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Rich Freeman @ 2014-01-21 17:50 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:26 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:47:50AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> If Comrel really objects to this I'm not entirely opposed to letting
>> QA have the reins (certainly we can't just let policy go unenforced
>> entirely). However, I would encourage the teams to give some thought
>> as to whether it makes sense to work together to separate the human vs
>> technical factors here.
>
> What about the scenario where qa makes a change, then the dev, in a
> civil manor, explains to qa why he prefers his original method and
> reverts QA's change without the agreement of QA and without presenting
> his case to the council? Now you have another qa violation since GLEP
> 48 states that QA's changes must stand until the council says otherwise.
> However, assuming the exchanges between qa and the dev are still
> respectful, I'm not sure there is a personal issue.
It isn't a personal issue, but it is a personnel / human-factors issue.
A developer is refusing to follow policy. The CofC is but one policy
- all the GLEPs are policy, as is the Devmanual. A developer who
refuses to follow policy is subject to action by Comrel. At least,
that is how I see the roles of the groups (but I'm open to
counter-argument).
The other way to do things is to make both groups responsible for what
amounts to HR, but then we need to make sure we staff QA accordingly.
QA can't then just solve the technical problems and deal with people
like you might deal with code, otherwise the Council and/or Comrel
really will end up having to deal with a bunch of personal problems.
QA stepping in with temporary bans as a band-aid solution to a more
serious problem is fine. However, dealing with the inter-personal
issues requires a different sort of skillset. A developer who doesn't
follow policy is either unable to do so or unwilling to do so. Either
problem might be correctable, or perhaps we'll just have to go our
separate ways. I think Comrel should be the body that is staffed with
the right skills to make that determination.
Rich
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2014-01-19 5:02 [gentoo-dev] rfc: formally allow qa to suspend commit rights William Hubbs
2014-01-20 1:24 ` Alec Warner
2014-01-20 2:54 ` Tom Wijsman
2014-01-20 13:59 ` Rich Freeman
2014-01-20 14:09 ` Alan McKinnon
2014-01-21 14:56 ` Tom Wijsman
2014-01-21 15:47 ` Rich Freeman
2014-01-21 17:26 ` William Hubbs
2014-01-21 17:50 99% ` Rich Freeman
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox