Tom Wijsman schrieb: > > [1]: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GLEP:48 > > "In the event that a developer still insists that a package does > not break QA standards, an appeal can be made at the next council > meeting. The package should be dealt with per QA's request until > such a time that a decision is made by the council." >
Thanks for this pointer, i guess this makes the existing situation pretty clear: If QA does a commit and a dev does disagree, he can discuss it with QA or ask for council decision, but should never revert this QA change on his own. So if the dev then does ignore this rule, he does not follow our written rules (problem with the behaviour) and as a result this becomes a case for comrel. Now if comrel cannot convince the dev to accept the QA change (at least until council decision), it means comrel would have to take disciplinary action (e.g. commit access removal). With this in mind, i currently dont see any case where QA would need the ability to remove the commit access of a dev, so i dont see a need for this glep update. -- Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
