Re: Q for Andreas Schuldei: "Small teams"??
Henning Makholm <email@example.com> wrote:
> I was imagining a situation where I needed, say, to have a hopelessly
> buggy package of mine removed from testing, but got told by the
> ftpmaster team that they needed to have the removal confirmed by my
> team leader. It would not make sense for the ftpmasters to say that
> they are not interested in removing it, but that I should look for
> another group that would be willing to do it. [...]
Does there have to be only one ftpmaster team? I'm not sure.
Anyway, if it is an ftpmasters team, they should have an interest
in that by definition, else why are they an ftpmasters team? I
would expect a DPL team to be interested in an ftpmasters team
claiming not to care about ftpmaster tasks. It may suggest that
the tasks need dividing between two teams (= giving ftpmasters
I've not gone through the whole range of possibilities, but
I suspect there are very few places where a new team couldn't
offer new contributors to a task an outlet, rerouting around
the damage of a closed team. Far trickier is a rogue team,
but I think the constitution offers some escapes.
Anyway, this is just my understanding of how these 7-groups
work and I'm not running.
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Subscribed to this list. No need to Cc, thanks.