On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 10:23 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 03/22/2012 08:54 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> >
> > That sounds all very reasonable to me but ultimately that's got
> > nothing to do what so ever to do with this issue or the board. It's up
> > to the relevant projects, and ev
On 03/22/2012 08:54 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
That sounds all very reasonable to me but ultimately that's got
nothing to do what so ever to do with this issue or the board. It's up
to the relevant projects, and even leaders within those projects, to
reach out to each other and sort the differ
On Mar 22, 2012 8:37 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
> On 03/22/2012 02:42 AM, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
>>
>>
>> There is detail going all the way back to June 2006 about Fedora Testing
and Bugzappers and the formation of those groups as subprojects.
>
>
> I'm very well aware of that and you can f
On 03/22/2012 02:42 AM, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
There is detail going all the way back to June 2006 about Fedora
Testing and Bugzappers and the formation of those groups as subprojects.
I'm very well aware of that and you can find my opinion on that matter
which is still unchanged after all th
On Mar 22, 2012 12:00 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
> On 03/21/2012 04:56 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>> Hey, folks.
>>
>> So here's some funny Fedora archaeology: QA is not actually officially a
>> Fedora sub-project. I didn't know this (and didn't particularly care!),
>> and neither did I
On 03/21/2012 06:59 PM, Jon Stanley wrote:
2012/3/21 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson":
Basically the board is faced with this.
A) make QA an SIG and merge bugzappers back into it
...why?
Or
B) Split the relevant parts of QA into their own indvidual SIG (
Triagers/Reporters/AutoQA etc ) with thei
2012/3/21 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" :
> Basically the board is faced with this.
>
> A) make QA an SIG and merge bugzappers back into it
>
> Or
>
> B) Split the relevant parts of QA into their own indvidual SIG (
> Triagers/Reporters/AutoQA etc ) with their own resources...
The Board can't confer re
On 03/22/2012 12:29 AM, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
So, the ultimate goal ... is to include 'quality assurance' under the
list of sub-projects in the left-side navigation menu on the wiki. Is
approval as a project required to achieve this? If so, I'd like to get
the ball rolling to define QA as a s
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 17:29 -0700, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
> On 03/21/2012 05:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 23:59 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > > On 03/21/2012 04:56 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > Hey, folks.
> > > >
> > > > So here's some funny Fedora arch
On 03/21/2012 05:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 23:59 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 03/21/2012 04:56 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hey, folks.
So here's some funny Fedora archaeology: QA is not actually officially a
Fedora sub-project. I didn't know this (and didn'
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 23:59 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 03/21/2012 04:56 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Hey, folks.
> >
> > So here's some funny Fedora archaeology: QA is not actually officially a
> > Fedora sub-project. I didn't know this (and didn't particularly care!),
> > and nei
On 03/21/2012 04:56 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hey, folks.
So here's some funny Fedora archaeology: QA is not actually officially a
Fedora sub-project. I didn't know this (and didn't particularly care!),
and neither did I know that, aeons ago (well, last year), jlaska kicked
off an attempt to ma
12 matches
Mail list logo
