From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <gentoo-qa+bounces-94-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>) id 1OmuLe-0003eC-RN for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 20:07:27 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7720EE0A76 for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 20:07:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com (mail-ww0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6A5E0972 for <gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 19:47:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwb39 with SMTP id 39so3250011wwb.10 for <gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:47:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:to:in-reply-to :references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer :content-transfer-encoding; bh=IvxIXmNtwdYjBrhUD/amFkC9syoVRrMA8yx50/YKYZI=; b=fSD49lLPZUUxAp+2PwG0mws+XlH5LDqE7UCrl01+xlT1Il+8uZiq1WF6Muy5DE62ra eVic7vEkozcfX1m0Etz2/0xUXEyHqcJhNhry1767NatYCe9bkm+0g3AsLNzFWdNjQ2x2 ynFeDNI7uNGuSCzfuUE2tEPytMdqcip/1xvzM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id :mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=UxRsl0okoOXTFiv9pPcMJaZs7mOPxBvDAKY8zQ6qr8mOXNYCod0kcaimZy++zDTEjC CSQOJRz6SE+nLYapXhh8l8UbjLp3mAMnafPwkZ8XhI60mn/bdcRHbPqCkVrDfbPedp15 9dm5pFv60vpuyAVJrNcPWe7ntk6TpNfbmvUCs= Received: by 10.227.68.145 with SMTP id v17mr2752289wbi.159.1282420044540; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.28.8.1] (host249-252-static.95-94-b.business.telecomitalia.it [94.95.252.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e31sm3735650wbe.11.2010.08.21.12.47.23 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-qa] QA power to suspend access [WAS: Re: Roll-call for the team members and requesting a new election] From: Diego Elio =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9CFlameeyes=E2=80=9D_?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Petten=F2?= <flameeyes@gmail.com> To: gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20100821181142.GA32624@halcy0n.com> References: <20100821181142.GA32624@halcy0n.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 21:47:35 +0200 Message-ID: <1282420055.445.54.camel@yamato.local> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-qa+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-qa+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-qa+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-qa.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 1b264cad-6458-46d1-a7f9-943842710f7d X-Archives-Hash: 150f3978440d3852342522e4a6b381a7 Il giorno sab, 21/08/2010 alle 14.11 -0400, Mark Loeser ha scritto: >=20 > #2 seems to alleviate any bottlenecks that could happen. What does > everyone else think? This can wait until after whatever is decided > with > the election, but the conversation should take place regardless.=20 I agree that #2 sounds the best. In case we all agree on that, should we ask devrel nicely to write that down on their own policy or do we have to pass through council? --=20 Diego Elio Petten=C3=B2 =E2=80=94 =E2=80=9CFlameeyes=E2=80=9D http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ If you found a .asc file in this mail and know not what it is, it's a GnuPG digital signature: http://www.gnupg.org/