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 make us one. As sub-project requests are filed as Board trac tickets, I can't link to it because of the Board's silly policy of making trac tickets private, so only they and jlaska can see it. But I'm assured it exists. If anyone is super-interested in this exciting, nay thrilling process, it's documented at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DefiningProjects#Fedora_Projects . Anyway, Robyn tells me that with its customary, legendary efficiency and speed, the Board has come to a swift decision a mere eight months later that QA should be accepted as a sub-project.
I'm a bit amazed that the board is going to approve some proposal that has not been presented to the QA community ( and I'm equally amazed that James did not present that to the QA community )
I for one would like to know exactly the details and the content of that ticket and an justification from the board on why it's approving an proposal that affects the whole QA community without the QA community actually knowing anything about it.
Robyn also requested that we have our 'goals' written down somewhere, and that we have some kind of section on leadership/governance.
There is no leadership or governance in the QA community other than the individual himself and there is no need to have one.
I'd say the line "It's our goal to continually improve the quality of Fedora releases and updates" on the front page of the wiki, plus the 'Activities' section below, pretty much covers goals. As far as leadership / governance goes, I propose adding the following to the wiki somewhere, I guess the front page (though I really want to keep that short and, um, free of silly bureaucracy, so if anyone can think of anywhere else...) == Governance == The QA project does not have a formal governance structure. Decision-making is done by broad consensus and peer review, a mechanism which has worked successfully for many years. There is no single leader of the QA project. Significant decisions will be taken by implied or explicit vote on the project mailing list, in the project meeting, or in a project trac ticket relevant to the issue at hand. Any issue requiring the QA team's input should be brought up on the project mailing list or at a project meeting, or filed as a project trac ticket.
Agreed I think the above describes us perfectly. JBG -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
