Mark Loeser wrote: > Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> The maintainer should be the absolute authority over his/her packages, >> and only the council should be able to overrule maintainer decisions in >> the case of disagreement between the maintainer and anybody else. > > I think it really depends on the situation, but in general I disagree > that something should be left in a state that the QA team finds > questionable/broken. It should be a very rare occurence that this comes > up, since we don't really want to override what the maintainer says, but > I think the QA team should have this right in extreme circumstances.
So if QA thinks one way is right, and the package maintainer thinks another way is right, you say QA always trumps? I'm looking at this as "innocent until proven guilty" versus "guilty until proven innocent." When parties are in disagreement, the _current_ situation should stand until the council (or the two groups in question) resolves it. That assumes lack of extenuating circumstances such as security vulnerabilities or major tree breakage. Thanks, Donnie
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
