Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Tuesday 23 October 2007 08:19, Gauvain Pocentek wrote: >> Please let's try to avoid that kind of behaviour, there are smarter ways >> to deal with problems in Ubuntu. > > What do you suggest? Once someone is a MOTU (or elected to MOTU Council) > there isn't AFAIK any process to deal with removal.
So one mistake and you're already wanting to drop upload priviledges? Anyway, I was more talking about the "I blame you on an ML". Maybe this could have been discussed in irc queries, in a private mail to the MC members > Personally, I was stunned by the discovery that any MOTU would upload > something to proposed that not only had they not tested, they didn't even > know HOW to test. I've done good work with geser in the past, but this case > just doesn't strike me as being an example of good judgement at work. Didn't he sent a mail to ask for tests? But again, I'm not judging the facts, but how the whole history turned into some kind of war. > I think, particularly as we have no voice in who gets nominated, that us > regular MOTUs should be able to closely question the people that the CC/TB > have decided are to be the masters of the masters so to speak. AFAICT you already do that and your judgment is taken into account. This is a one > time decision and it needs to be right. Personally, I'm more worried about > getting the best MOTU council possible to make good decisions for our future > than I am about a few ruffled feathers along the way. If it's really something that MOTUs feel, it's right the time to discuss it in a meeting or in an other ML thread to maybe set up new policies. I don't think that the MC has ever rejected discussion of new proposals from the developers community. Gauvain -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
