AL> We'll give that some thought, at the moment the work done isn't so
AL> astounding as to require it though.
When how can you call that QA?
I must have misunderstood the meaning of QA word in common sence with
your position, but you can't describe your POV.
To me QA does nothing, wants to control a lot and don't want to be
controlled too.
Excuse me ? control a lot ? I don't think so.
If you want to help qa write some mails to the list, make a draft of the qa people should do and ask for review, then write an RFC. Stop saying you *want* and help make it.
I propose to make QA a status - not a privilege. Status can be
assigned only after a person contributed a great amount of time and
energy to close or propose patches to QA tracker.
QA members can't be elected. Especially by 7 votes result. =/
You need to understand that you are thinking about the QA core team. Anybody subscribing to the qa list becomes a qa member, it is not a privilege. Core team members have some special rights on pearweb and that is about it.
AL> What do you mean by QA request ?
Well, if QA does nothing then there's no such thing as QA request.
Then I don't know what is QA request. Maybe a request to work on
QA issue?
I ask what you mean by a QA request, is that too much to ask ?
Well, to tell the truth I haven't noticed any opinion in your letter. =/
When I say I don't think we need a weekly status document yet it *is* an opinion.
Arnaud.