On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 22:06 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On mán 16.des 2013 21:45, Mike Ruckman wrote: > > For those of us who haven't been with QA for even a year yet, can you > > give a brief "too long; didn't read" synopsis of your reasoning and > > where it stems from? Without some form of background it's hard to infer > > what your reasoning is. > > You can look at the archive why we initially dropped the QA group and Do you have specific links for that? "the archive" is several years big, it's probably easier to find if you were there at the time and remember the approximate date or the thread title or something. > the reasoning why we should not revive the QA group is related to the > future and I ain't talking about the future WG's "providing" us with but > an actual future and direction for the project be heading into. > > Adam is right about what's wrong but as so often he's trying to fix it > in the wrong place... What, in your estimation, would be the right place? Instead of just saying 'no', can you provide an alternative solution to the problem? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
