On Wed, 5 Feb 2014 22:03:09 +0000 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Feb 2014 22:50:57 +0100 > Tom Wijsman <tom...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 05 Feb 2014 10:26:01 -0600 > > Steev Klimaszewski <st...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > There is more to it than that. Normally discussions can be good, > > > but when you try to talk to a brick wall, it's absolutely > > > pointless. > > > > QA team's decisions require more than a flip of a dime; it takes a > > little more involvement, as well as solid evidence and reasoning. > > Why? Because QA team's decisions are decided on during a QA team meeting that happens once a month, just like the Gentoo Council does; it requires us to talk about it and work towards a decision, otherwise a statement can't be formed and we can't vote on that statement. If we were brick walls, this policy would never get formed; exactly the opposite is happening here, after the reason that I was asking for here became clear in #gentoo-dev we are going to further discuss it to adapt. The solid evidence (that it can be misinterpreted) and reasoning (that its misinterpretations lead to situations that we don't want) both are sufficient to revise the policy. Without those, we get what you see in this thread; the lack of evidence and reasoning not showing why the policy in its current form would cause breakage, or why particular other solutions would work out well. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
