Who are QA?

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 14:07 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> Actually for the entire email as it comes across very rambling and
> unfocused. Could you rewrite and resend? 

Take three all put together hopefully clearer.. 

There was a recent topic raised on [1] with regards it was difficult to 
find information how Fedora is governed. 

QA community has never voted on any QA board to handle any decision
making which kinda makes our community more or less self governed and
yet there have been cases where it has been mentioned that QA has
decided and QA has voted on various topics which may appear confusing to
outsiders and even our own community since we don't have any community
QA board

We don't have anything on the QA page ( and most likely elsewhere ) that
explaining how QA is governed ( Triagers/Reporters/AutoQA etc. ) within
the QA community. ( Which should not come as a surprise since we don't
actually have any governs so to speak ) 

There are of course people in employment from Red Hat that are paid full
time to work in the QA community as there are other Red Hat employs paid
to work in other aspects of the Fedora project which in turns begs
question who actually hold any kind of authority over any kind of
decision making within the QA community.

Some of of us know that it's most likely James that made that decision
and or Adam or some other Red Hat employee but to newcomers or people
generally unfamiliar to/with our community it may appear confusing.

For example hows the board supposed to be able to clear that up to
people without us doing it first within the QA community?

Do we want/need to vote a QA board/SIG that will handle that decision
making in the future or would listing of those individuals with some
kind of authority/decision/ruling power from the QA community on the QA
wikipage suffice or perhaps something else?

What do new members/recently joined members of our community have to say
about this? 

JBG

[1]
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2011-March/010584.html