Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-04-08

[Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org>]

On 06/04/14 20:33, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> On 04/06/2014 11:10 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> > On 06/04/14 15:47, hasufell wrote:
> >> Andreas K. Huettel:
> >>> 5) The council encourages teams maintaining central parts of Gentoo
> >>> to accept new developers as team members and teach them the
> >>> required knowledge and intricacies. We consider this important to
> >>> ensure long-term continuity and increase the bus factor in critical
> >>> areas.
> >>
> >>
> >> Or don't accept them as team members in the first place, which is
> >> perfectly fine if you can still contribute as a non-team member.
>
> > I agree, new developers shouldn't be allowed in the QA team, there
> > should be some 5 year limit
> > at least as safe kludge to avoid disrespect like this:
>
> > #gentoo-qa, yesterday:
>
> > 21:37 <@Zero_Chaos> floppym: honestly there are a few "senior" gentoo
> > developers which could be shot in the head for all I care.
>
> I fully stand by my statements.

Makes me sad. I can't see how you could ever manage to communicate with
some people you have
to communicate as in your role in the in QA team.
It requires some so called "customer service" skills, neutrality,
following estabilished policies instead
of making up your own and trying to enforce those made up ones with
harsh language.
You should reconsider if you are the best fit for the team, if you want
best for Gentoo, and do the right
thing, and resign from the team, and work on other areas where you don't
need to communicate so much with others.

> There are a few senior developers who
> feel they can do whatever they like.

I haven't seen any, could be you be more specific? Yes, I've seen some
older developers, including
myself, keeping their old workflow, but that's hardly "do whatever they
like"

> They ignore policy,

I haven't seen any, could you be more specific what policies have been
violated, and by whom?

> revert things others have done to improve gentoo,

Again, I haven't seen anything like this, yes, there has been some
reverts (including by myself), but
nothing that has "improved gentoo" has been reverted.

> or otherwise make major changes without consulting anyone.

If you are referring to our last issue, re: the new virtuals, I've
already proofed the issue has been
discussed in the past and even documented down in the wiki. It's what
the council voted for when
they allowed use of subslots in gentoo-x86.
If this is not what you meant, again, could you be more specific what
and whom you mean?

- Samuli