Re: PEAR a way forward
| From: | Scott Mattocks | Date: | Thu, 05 Oct 2006 17:21:58 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: PEAR a way forward | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-44372@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Alexey Borzov wrote:
QA team already had rotation mechanisms in place. And it was supposedly comprised of people who wanted to do the job (since these people volunteered for QA team in the first place).There was one RFC to renew the QA team and it got stuck. There was never a defined process to updating the members. Basically, one member got tired of doing all the work and decided to get new people in there.
So, Scott, please enlighten me on two points: 1) Why did the previous QA team fail?The members lost interest.
2) Why will the QA team you propose succeed?The members are renewed with people that have in interest.
The community every time there is a vote. ScottPlus, I want to provide specific points of accountability for the groups. If you don't do your job, you get the boot and someone who will do it takes over.Who exactly will be giving this "boot"?