Re: [gentoo-dev] DevRel policy update
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Chrissy Fullam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wulf C. Krueger wrote: As this change directly affects developers only, please take further discussion to the Gentoo-core ML. I'd like to, but I appear to have been unsubscribed from that list. Assuming that my retirement and this change in policy are not unrelated, I'm afraid you appear to have not followed your own policy. The new policy reads: The critical nature of an escalation may be determined by the Developer Relations Lead or Infrastructure, for security-related issues, that which would endanger Gentoo, or our reputation. An issue that is deemed critical does not need further justification in addition to stating which of the above situations it falls under. In the email you sent kindly sent me informing me of my retirement: In light of the escalation and review of recent issues, you have had your developer rights revoked for your repeated and aggravated behavior despite numerous attempts to correct that. Gentoo will not tolerate these continued repeat offenses and as such Developer Relations has acted under Developer Policy: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml. Per that policy you have the right to appeal this decision to Gentoo Council. You make no mention of the issue being critical, or under which of the two criteria I should have been retired under. Please ask infra to restore my access until such time as you are able to follow your own policy for conflict resolution. I'll be waiting for a proper bug that I can read that explains what I did to whom, and when and how they complained. Regards, -- Richard Brown -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] DevRel policy update
On 27-04-2008 22:06:30 +0200, Wulf C. Krueger wrote: How to gain power the easy way and obsolete conflict resolution in just one commit: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml?r1=1.18r2=1.19 I noticed the same, but there probably was a better way to put attention to this remarkable policy. I assume it is just a better, more explicit wording of already existing policy, considering the original version. The policy appears worrysome to me, but in my opinion seems not to be introduced by this commit. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] DevRel policy update
Wulf C. Krueger kirjoitti: How to gain power the easy way and obsolete conflict resolution in just one commit: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml?r1=1.18r2=1.19 Please use the appropriate mailing list. Nothing technical here. This thread belongs to -project. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
RE: [gentoo-dev] DevRel policy update
Wulf C. Krueger wrote: How to gain power the easy way and obsolete conflict resolution in just one commit: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/poli cy.xml?r1=1.18r2=1.19 Neither Developer Relations as a whole or myself as the Lead acts without a system for checks and balances. If you read the policy change, such a system is in place. And if you notice, this 'power' is authorized by our elected Council. As this change directly affects developers only, please take further discussion to the Gentoo-core ML. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] DevRel policy update
Wulf C. Krueger wrote: How to gain power the easy way and obsolete conflict resolution in just one commit: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml?r1=1.18r2=1.19 Those are quite strong words. As grobian said it doesn't change at all what has been the normal way to address certain situations. The council has the last word as usual and the council can ask infra to perform such tasks. We spend time on gentoo not because we seek power but because we like help improving something we consider valuable. Having an extrema ratio/last resort in order to protect it isn't that uncommon. Council was notified in advance of the written policy change and approved it. musikc never abused her position and I'm confident she won't in the future. On the other hand we got MANY complaints about your behavior lately. -- Luca Barbato Gentoo Council Member Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] DevRel policy update
Petteri Räty wrote: Wulf C. Krueger kirjoitti: How to gain power the easy way and obsolete conflict resolution in just one commit: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml?r1=1.18r2=1.19 Please use the appropriate mailing list. Nothing technical here. This thread belongs to -project. Indeed. I agree it simply clarifies the existing policy, in that devrel lead or infra previously had a call on whether an issue were critical. It'll still be transparent and a lead who used that power lightly would soon get relieved of duty one would hope. (If not kick up a stink then, not now, as nothing's really changed.) -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
