Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers

❦ 1 décembre 2016 15:46 GMT, Ian Jackson  : > There is a recent case where: > * The maintainer has done nothing to the package for many years, >other than infrequent (and usually short) emails to NAK >contributions from others; > * The package is years

Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers

Sean Whitton writes ("Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers"): > Although I don't personally know of any such DDs, I agree that random > selection sounds like a bad idea. DDs who don't want to be involved in > this sort of work would feel under some obligati

Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers

Mattia Rizzolo writes ("Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers"): > We have a very similar case within the MIA team [...] Thanks, yes, I remember reading about that. I think less-severe but still very bad situations are probably more common :-/. > > 2. Provide a new p

Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers

Hello, On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 03:46:05PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > Regardless of the reasons, this is not good enough. > > Maintainership is a leadership position, with serious governance > authority. Leaders must be accountable. Bad leaders must be > replaced. > > It is clear to me that

Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers

On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 03:46:05PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > There is a recent case where: > * The maintainer has done nothing to the package for many years, >other than infrequent (and usually short) emails to NAK >contributions from others; > * The package is years out of date

Replace the TC power to depose maintainers

In our current arrangements, the TC is the only body who can rescue a package from a maintainer who is determined to sit on it.[1] The TC have never exercised this power, when a maintainer has insisted that they want to keep maintaining the package. It is surely obvious that there must have been

<    1   2