RE: [ros-dev] TC function description: Call for vote

[Ge van Geldorp]

>   From: Alex Ionescu
>  
>  I agree with everything, including removing "The TC has final 
>  say over the priority of a bug." which caused all this, but 
>  is it really right to remove:
>  
>  "By his election, the developers have agreed to trust in his 
>  judgement related to bug priorities"? It would seem to me 
>  like that's a given. It doesn't represent any grant of power, 
>  just states the obvious. We're voting for Foo as TC because 
>  we trust he'll be a good TC. 
If it's a given and obvious, there's no reason to put it in? The problem
with the sentence is that it can be read to imply that the TCs decisions in
this regard cannot be overridden by a developers vote. Since it didn't seem
to add anything but could be misinterpreted, the simplest solution was to
just drop it.

>   Addtionally: 
>  "must not hinder any legitimate efforts that the TC is 
>  attempting in order to prioritize bugs." is also not an 
>  adtional grant of power, but simply specifies that if the TC 
>  thinks Bug XXX is low priority, a developer (i'm talking 
>  about one, not a majority) shouldn't constantly raise it back 
>  to BLOCKER just because he feels this is very important to 
>  him. I think this is also normal curteous behaviour... 
Royce pointed out
(http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2005-October/005779.html)
that "legitimate" isn't very precise. Again, since it doesn't add
anything
(the TC is given administrative control over the Bugzilla installation in
the previous paragraph) I dropped it.

GvG