On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 22:33 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On mán 16.des 2013 22:12, Adam Williamson wrote: > > What, in your estimation, would be the right place? Instead of just > > saying 'no', can you provide an alternative solution to the problem? > > Solution to fix this lies not within in us ( QA ) the alternative > solution requires a real change in the project not dressing the emperor > in new clothes which the WG proposal does. Well, I mean, I agree there are potentially other approaches to granting things like fedorapeople access and so on, but any change like that would be a big one which would likely involve lots of proposing and arguing and take a lot of time. I personally am not interested in driving such a change. The mechanics of FAS group membership and so on are not, in and of themselves, interesting to me, so this isn't something I want to work on. All I'm trying to do is remove a speedbump for new QA group members that we keep encountering, in the most simple and obvious way: currently the way the Fedora project is set up, it expects members of Fedora groups/projects like QA to be in a FAS group, so let's just do that. -- 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
