Hi,
Frank Schönheit - Sun Microsystems Germany schrieb:
Juste a note: with "discussed in the project" and "escalated to the
project lead" we speak about the project, that is the issue owner (e.g.
sw for a Word Processor Issue). Escalation to the project leads list
might be difficult, if the concerns are brought in by users and the
project lead is not responsive. Users are normally not subscribed to the
project leads list .. so we have no way to escalate.
I'd say, we should name the qa project (or the council'S communit
representative) as a possible way for escalation (if responsible project
lead is not responsive).
Sounds reasonable. Could you suggest a wording for the policy which
states this?
well .. this was your initial suggestion:
In case that the changed functionality/behaviour is controversial, this
should be discussed in the project and if needed, escalated to the
project lead (next step of escalation would be project leads list).
I'd suggest:
In case that the changed functionality/behaviour is controversial, this
should be discussed in the project ( corresponding to the Issue Tracker
Component). and may be brought to the project lead to come to a
decision. If neccesary, the issue could be escalated to the
project lead be project leads list (if you cannot escalate to the
project leads list yourself, contact the Community Contributor
Representative at the Community Council or the QA project).
André
PS.: As I still think, the proposal is good, we should go on and
introduce the keywords.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
