QA as a sub-project: draft 'governance' section for the wiki

[Jon Stanley]

2012/3/21 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg at gmail.com>:

> Basically the board is faced with this.
>
> A) make QA an SIG and merge bugzappers back into it
>
> Or
>
> B) Split the relevant parts of QA into their own indvidual SIG (
> Triagers/Reporters/AutoQA etc ) with their own resources...

The Board can't confer resources on anything, really.  What type of
"resources" are you referring to? Are there resources that these
various functions (that I believe all belong under the QA umbrella,
but that's just my personal opinion) need that they don't have today?

> We did not reach consensus back in the day but hey feel free to decide this
> for us...

Speaking with my own individual Board hat on, I don't think that we're
looking to "decide" anything for QA. In fact, I found it sort of
ludicrous that the whole intention of the ticket was to get some sort
of blessing so that QA could be on the left navbar of the wiki - which
in my mind shouldn't require any special status being bestowed on a
group by the Board, it should just require as Adam stated in his
proposed "governance" policy - broad consensus that this is The Right
Thing To Do(TM).

As for the bugzappers, I don't believe that they had any special
status conferred on them, or pulled any strings - but they were on the
left side of the wiki long before my time (which started all the way
back in 2007, when I had to gpg sign my CLA and the wiki was still
MoinMoin!)