From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-3560-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (unknown [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A9F1381FA
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 10 May 2014 13:43:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F349E0A61;
	Sat, 10 May 2014 13:43:11 +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 C891CE0A52
	for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 10 May 2014 13:43:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from 127.0.0.1 (unknown [31.172.30.4])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: hasufell)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DDA7133D762
	for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 10 May 2014 13:43:08 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <536E2CE8.1070807@gentoo.org>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 13:43:04 +0000
From: hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call For Agenda Items - 13 May 2014
References: <CAGfcS_n-u9T7xec7YGumsnkMXRRnHWQ2i+3SEha+69veSP--WQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAGfcS_nc5DRqy5urW9WjqgD2EKvmc5Ls7Pee2h4Z73xpnx0Q9Q@mail.gmail.com>	<536CE132.1070305@gentoo.org>	<20140509172925.29e3f212@gentoo.org>	<536D13CF.2000403@gentoo.org>	<536D183A.1020405@gentoo.org>	<CAGfcS_nDhAtE8Xw24NPwJeZyZ7rH3iB0VETHVBP+bvU-6T2iyg@mail.gmail.com>	<536D1C28.1010504@gentoo.org>	<20140509203727.1d6a3e69@gentoo.org>	<536D2231.6030808@gentoo.org>	<536E1FA7.5050704@gentoo.org> <CAGfcS_=LPHpC_JTN4o9deaKJ2xfOwWLDoT4XZmpNtn8o2F75vw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGfcS_=LPHpC_JTN4o9deaKJ2xfOwWLDoT4XZmpNtn8o2F75vw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 965ccb18-2392-49a0-9958-e53732232c41
X-Archives-Hash: a736e67143432cdb6fb97c35289c818d

Rich Freeman:
> 
> Honestly, I'm not a big fan of QA taking on the role of the body that
> makes controversial decisions.

Exactly, they should rather be the guys who jump in discussions that
affect tree consistency etc. and help with general inquiries. Instead,
they point me to dev-ML and... council.

> I think they're the right place to
> start with questions like these, but when there is an issue that isn't
> clear-cut I think that is what the council is for.  I'm not saying
> that QA shouldn't ever be able to make policy - only that it should
> use discretion when doing so, and that seems to be what is happening
> here.
> 

As I said... I have done a lot of inquiries to QA, both regarding the
new and the old team. It hasn't improved, you know?