From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (unknown [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D348E1381FA for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 13:51:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4D941E0B99; Fri, 16 May 2014 13:51:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ve0-f169.google.com (mail-ve0-f169.google.com [209.85.128.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEB87E0B93 for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 13:51:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ve0-f169.google.com with SMTP id jx11so3192261veb.0 for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 06:51:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=vMJmx4izbBZvEQJ71nXTeku4Ru/diCNmDQ/BDFmVinM=; b=UcI9xddyzDU0Jaw2uf95THQdhJaNwXKSvmmhIOp8/ZFKGcndZVSfV7XC0rFzK3E5og BpB9ePf2T8UIbZ1wDy9/k9mR5hvxIZALbWU7ZWgPQ2Q5Bh6TlNROyd2CpozY2AZBTc6/ rildF35ReHNvAqldmOchH3Lh0ifkpwWIcPo9kSUuWNhbTthHEMdVuPYJsrs6J2KZZLdb g0JxZLspacxZkuWPtXpSLUieJ53AN/JESI5NBR5UPtpMQzFlpK4C2DV8MKsXAUsSL+JI Df6bKYSflCF2yDClA9B/QRVrwb1TNR5pP/bHtC12Vc4JE2dPNLi9NDR7FME96p2roSki 0Bjw== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.221.30.14 with SMTP id sa14mr766019vcb.44.1400248314953; Fri, 16 May 2014 06:51:54 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.30.227 with HTTP; Fri, 16 May 2014 06:51:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <53760525.9090300@gentoo.org> References: <536D2231.6030808@gentoo.org> <536E1FA7.5050704@gentoo.org> <2731252.LOkG5ql5OK@localhost> <536FE7C4.2090403@gentoo.org> <537481BE.1070609@gentoo.org> <5374A32B.9000805@gentoo.org> <53760525.9090300@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 09:51:54 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: U10D21_KsIEAmDmWTU-A0Q1zDGQ Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] OT - Tinderbox question From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 417388b2-b973-47c9-8ddf-441cbf59875f X-Archives-Hash: 2a71d1144edd557a253f649c0face76d On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > > On 15/05/14 20:17, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 7:21 AM, hasufell wrote: >>> Sergey Popov: >>>> And yes, we need tinderbox. But, c'mon. stop talking loudly on ML and >>>> get things done if you can. >>>> >>> This is like working on patches while upstream already said "not >>> interested". >>> >>> Since QA doesn't think it's their job to run a tinderbox, I will work >>> with those people who actually care about it, instead of QA. >> Perhaps you should let QA speak for what it thinks its job is? Note >> that random posts in random bugs by random members of QA isn't the >> same as QA saying something. > > Except it is, that's what QA just voted in their own meeting, > one QA member represents the whole team. I suspect the intent of their vote was that QA members could take action individually in the name of QA. That doesn't necessarily mean that every time you sneeze and a QA member says "God bless you" that QA is making an official proclamation on the Gentoo state religion. The QA team is a bit immature, but it is good practice to be explicit when you're speaking on behalf of an official role. I'm on the Council, but nothing I'm posting in this email represents the opinion of the Council, and beyond general code of conduct nobody is going to get in trouble for ignoring it. On the other hand, I just posted the official summary of the last Council meeting and everybody should assume by default that it DOES represent the opinion of the Council and is enforceable. That doesn't mean that somebody couldn't point out a mistake and have it corrected, but it should be viewed as having a place of authority. However, when I'm posting random emails to the lists, they should be viewed as my own personal opinion whether I state so or not, especially since we tend to appoint roles like QA/Comrel/Council/etc out of our active developer body and we don't hire full-time professionals who only do those roles. So, maybe what QA voted on was a bit sloppy, but if we want every Gentoo policy to be absolutely without ambiguity or loophole than I'll find something better to do with my time. I'm personally convinced that writing perfect laws to govern human behavior makes writing perfect software seem almost trivial in comparison. Rich