>>>>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2018, Mike wrote: > Picking random email.
> I would like to say I'm glad we can discuss our technical differences > like this with both sides expressing their opinion and reasoning. > I would hope in the future we start with this path and not with > disciplinary action or bugs requesting the removal of commit access. > We're showing here we can bring up our points without handing out "QA > strikes" or some other type of confrontational action. Sorry, but I am tired of that antagonising of the QA team. There hasn't been any bug about commit access removal. And not sure what you mean with "QA strike", but there also wasn't any direct QA action on the package that triggered the current discussion. After being CCed to a bug, the QA team has merely pointed out to the maintainer that the package is not in agreement with the current policy (as it is defined in the devmanual). IMHO this is the QA team's purpose. Or what would you expect us to do instead? Remain silent if asked by another developer to evaluate an issue? Then we could as well disband QA. Also note that there are several remedies if there is disagreement between a maintainer and QA, like asking QA for an exception, appealing to the council, or changing the policy in question. Ulrich
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
