[Hey, I didn't Cc you, why do you Cc me know? I read -qa and -project, so I don't really need three copies of this mail.]
On 00-12-17 Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > Well, what you propose here is an an removal of a debian developer and I
> > don't think this should be so easy as you describe it. We should be able
> > to have a checklist and if some checks fail delete his debian account.
> > If someone is really MIA and won't come back, we should only disable
> > first his account, so that he needs to contact us again, to show that he
> > has again enough time for debian, but an exclusion should only happen
> > after a vote, so that either the majority of developers agreed or not.
> >
> > About the take-over of a package, have you read the nice document on
> > qa.debian.org, that Raphael Hertzog and I wrote some time ago, to take
> > care of this situation? We already have some guidelines, but they are
> > just not used. :( So there's no real need to invent the wheel again, but
> > to take the current situation and documents and apply them to debian.
> I've seen these not yet used guidelines for taking over packages and I
> don't want to take the account of a member of Debian "easy". But I don't
> want to start this discussions before the NM discussion has shown results
> - one big discussion at a time is enough.
Agreed.
Ciao
Christian
--
Debian Developer and Quality Assurance Team Member
1024/26CC7853 31E6 A8CA 68FC 284F 7D16 63EC A9E6 67FF 26CC 7853
pgpzUfrdsbT6S.pgp
Description: PGP signature
