From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-11-12
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 08:10:57 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_mCYwhJZ_HMjEc13n8yag0am_omTWeTzy65ZuhsRVv1Kg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21108.52901.967945.808689@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 6:06 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I think that the QA team should be given a chance to resolve the issue
> within the framework of GLEP 48.
++
> However, the council appointing a project
> lead would be against the principles of both GLEP 48
Agree.
> and (more
> important) GLEP 39.
In what way? I don't think GLEP 39 was really intended to cover
"special" projects - in fact the whole point of it is that projects
aren't special. Per GLEP 39 I could start my own "Quality" project if
I wanted to, as well as my own "Developer Discipline" project too.
That would of course be silly. Competing projects make sense on
technical initiatives, but not on administrative ones.
In any case, GLEP 48 already overrides GLEP 39 insofar as team
composition goes, so the precedent has already been set for the
Council making these sorts of decisions.
> So maybe the council should rather admit new
> members to the team.
Not sure how that is any better than just confirming a lead. Are you
suggesting that we can't have a say in who the lead is, but we can
appoint any number of sock-puppets to the team?
I really don't want to take action without hearing from the current
team (assuming they comment). However, I don't see any reason that we
shouldn't take action if there is a good reason to do so. This isn't
Wikipedia - we don't need to cite the right combination of policies to
get something done...
Rich
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-02 12:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-29 13:22 [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-11-12 Andreas K. Huettel
2013-10-29 14:21 ` Rich Freeman
2013-11-01 16:25 ` [gentoo-project] " Michael Palimaka
2013-11-01 20:27 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2013-11-02 3:24 ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2013-11-02 3:45 ` Rich Freeman
2013-11-02 10:06 ` Ulrich Mueller
2013-11-02 12:10 ` Rich Freeman [this message]
2013-11-02 13:08 ` Michael Palimaka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAGfcS_mCYwhJZ_HMjEc13n8yag0am_omTWeTzy65ZuhsRVv1Kg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=rich0@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox