[Development] Qbs development
abbapoh at gmail.com
Tue Sep 14 19:44:01 CEST 2021
Thanks for the response.
I can provide a third option - we can move Qbs out of the Qt Governance Model by moving to GitHub. I have raised this topic on our Discord server and the community overall seems positive - there were several votes for the migration and no votes against. This migration might be healthy to Qbs as a lot of newcomers are not familiar with Gerrit but familiar with GitHub and it’s pull-request model.
Also, it will clearly separate who can approve/reject patches to Qbs and to the rest of Qt world.
If there are no objections, I will create an INFRA issue about the migration - it should not be very hard to do.
> 14 сент. 2021 г., в 17:33, Lars Knoll <lars.knoll at qt.io> написал(а):
> Let’s also take up the formal part of the request.
>>> On 13 Sep 2021, at 22:59, Иван Комиссаров <abbapoh at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Also, some actions might be taken to prevent from happening in the future - if technically possible, I’d like to request the revoke of his approver rights on the Qbs project as per this part of the Qt Governance Model:
>>> «In extreme circumstances Approver privileges can be revoked by a vote of no confidence, proposed by an existing Approver or Maintainer and arranged by the Chief Maintainer. Privilege revocation requires a two-thirds majority vote of those Approvers and Maintainers who express an opinion.» 
>> On 14 Sep 2021, at 12:34, Richard Weickelt <richard at weickelt.de> wrote:
>> The question is whether this is an abuse of approver rights.
>> This is a relevant question for the Qt project. Any person with approver
>> rights has the ability to cause a production stop. Ivan is asking for help
>> in this particular case and I am seconding his request.
> Ivan and Richard, do I understand you correctly that you’d like to have a formal vote of no confidence according to QUIP-2? Please understand that this clause is meant as a last resort, when other solutions have failed.
> We will also need to consider that the Qt Governance Model only defines global Approver rights for all of the Qt Project. The request was however limited to QBS, so we would need to find a way to handle this. I can only see two options there, either we start extending our governance model here (can be done with a lazy consensus on that extension), or change the scope to the whole project having much more severe implications.
> Ossi, I (and probably others on this mailing list) would also like to hear your view on this. As I stated in my previous mail in this thread, I strongly believe, that the people doing the actual work decide on the direction and individual changes. The Governance model states the same, the maintainer takes the decision in case no agreement can be reached. As far as I can see, your actions are conflicting with this.
> Thank you,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Development