On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 5 Dec 2014, Andrew Savchenko wrote: > >> If GLEP doesn't reflect current best practices maybe this is a good >> time to supersede it with a new one? > > Not this again, please. :( The GLEP outlines the framework under which > QA operates, but there is no need to codify every detail in a GLEP > (which is somewhat hard to change). > > In fact, the QA team has its own internal policy document: > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Policies#Communication_When_Making_Fixes > If something should be missing there, we are certainly open for > additions or changes. >
++ The GLEP should give QA reasonably wide discretion to act when it feels it is an emergency. It shouldn't spell out every detail of how they operate. View it like a "grant of authority" or "charter" in a company. QA should of course try to work with maintainers and communicate with them as quickly as it can under the circumstances. Not everything should be treated as an emergency. It sounds like the policy already is to communicate when making changes (either before or after the fact depending on severity). If it wasn't followed, well, let's try to follow it next time. As long as it isn't a regular thing I don't know that it has to go further than that (we have QA because all of us make mistakes, and I'm sure QA will make mistakes as well). If it is a regular thing by all means feel free to escalate it. -- Rich
