Re: QA karma, clockwerx

On 26 October 2010 02:55, Daniel O'Connor <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey all,
> I think one of the problems we have is that written and unwritten rules
> aren't really enforced too often. I pissed a lot of active maintainers off
> recently, and did so by breaking an unwritten rule about communication.
>
> I think it would be healthy to bring this issue to a head; so...
> http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=60
>
> Should clockwerx retain QA karma?
> +1 / -1
>
> Though the rules say vote-on-list, but due to the nature of the vote (some
> may not feel comfortable being public); David Coallier, can you collate
> instead and publish the results back here?
>
> The rules state a 50% majority needed; of simply these folks:
>
> Tobias Schlitt
> David Costa
> Klaus Guenther
> Arnaud Limbourg
> Stephan Schmidt
> Davey Shafik
> Helgi Þormar Þorbjörnsson
> Ken Guest
> Daniel O'Connor
> Jesús Espino
>
> However, a lot of these folks aren't active in PEAR at the moment, and a lot
> of the folks affected (izi, till, avb, rqualdling are the ones I noticed)
> aren't on that list - I would like to include them, or anyone in the PEAR
> group who wishes to vote either way.
>
> Could I ask for a rough deadline of Monday November 8th (approx 2 weeks)?
>
>

As I've been asked for an opinion, I have to say I don't have one or
nor enough information to base one on.

0


-- 
Richard Quadling
Twitter : EE : Zend
@RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY