On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 04:37:52PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:09:01 +0000 John Mylchreest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | In this specific instance, impossible is effectively a point of view. > | For me the question comes down to this.. If QA trump maintainer, then > | who picks the QA staff? If anyone can become QA staff, then this is > | questionable in itself. is QA becoming another council with a sole > | purpose? If so I'd like to see an election again. At the end of the > | day the pack have to have faith in the team doing the work, and > | disagreements are obviously contrary to that. > > QA consists of whoever is on the QA project page. To be added, you must > convince the existing QA team that you know what you're doing.
My point was the more along the lines that the existing QA team need to convince the rest of the development community that they know what they're doing first. Whats stopping the existing QA team disregarding all new applicants because they enjoy having authority? Especially when its mis-placed authority. -- Role: Gentoo Linux Kernel Lead Gentoo Linux: http://www.gentoo.org Public Key: gpg --recv-keys 9C745515 Key fingerprint: A0AF F3C8 D699 A05A EC5C 24F7 95AA 241D 9C74 5515
pgpe2CwZZJnYv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
