On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 14:32:45 +0000, Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> [2004-03-05 15:25]:
>> > I disagree with this. I think that maintainers who neglect their
>> > duties and don't follow documented procedures (orphan their
>> > packages, inform the keyring maintainer that they are leaving the
>> > project [1]) should not be treated the same as maintainers who
>> > leave the project properly.
>>
>> Then how should they be treated, exactly?
> They should be treated like people who don't follow their duties,
We have duties now? Can you point to me where it says that? I
looked all over the constitution, and failed.
> which is what they did. In practice, this means that someone who
> left Debian properly by resigning can easily come back by mailing
> the keyring maintainer. Those who did not retire properly, on the
> other hand, will have to go through New Maintainer in order to
> ensure they understand their duties and procedures in Debian. --
I think we need to ask the NM team where they are making this
stuff about duties up from. Since when have we stopped being a
collection of volunteers? When did the slave driving start? Can I
have a whip?
manoj
--
"May our nation continue to be the beakon of hope to the world." The
Quayles' 1989 Christmas card. [Not a beacon of literacy, though.]
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
