* Ian Jackson ([email protected]) [130416 12:47]: > Goswin von Brederlow writes ("Re: FTP masters willingly blocking OpenStack > nova 2013.1 just right before the OpenStack summit"): > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 01:34:25PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > You should refer to the TC when it becomes clear that neither you nor > > > the ftpmasters are going to be convinced, or if you feel that the > > > ftpmasters aren't engaging sufficiently constructively in the > > > conversation. > ... > > Unfortunately even the TC can't force the ftp team to engage in any > > conversation. Basically they can overrule a conversation but they > > can't overrule silence. They can overrule a bad reason given but they > > can't overrule when no reason is given. > > For the record, this is not how I would approach such a question. > > In the absence of a coherent rationale for a decision we're asked to > review (whether made by a maintainer, ftpmasters, or whoever), I would > vote to overrule. > > Such a rationale might be provided by the parties to the dispute, or > by others, or might be evident to, and explained by, some or all of > the committee members. In the case of #535645 I think the decision > was taken based on a rationale most clearly enunciated by Andi and > Steve.
To see an example where we overrule, see #698556 where we decided to overrule a maintainer *because* there was no sufficient cause communicated for a decision. I would have been more happy with more communication, but in the end, we had to decide with what we got. Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
