On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:20:47PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> On August 5, 2018 7:41:41 AM UTC, Tobias Frost wrote:
> >
> >Yes, the TC has the power to decide ultimately about maintainership
> >when
> >there is an dispute and if involved parties failed find consesus. The
> >proposed pro
Scott Kitterman:
> [...]
>
> So a maintainer misses one email and anything goes?
>
The maintainer would get no less than two emails AFAICT:
* One when the ITS is filed.
* Another one after 21 days when the maintainer is *explicitly* CC'ed
on the nmudiff for the NMU (that is required to c
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 02:47:58PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> On August 5, 2018 2:17:04 PM UTC, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:20:47PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >> Package 'salvaging' is about an involuntary change of maintainer
> >involving
> >> someone who is
On August 5, 2018 2:17:04 PM UTC, Adam Borowski wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:20:47PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> Package 'salvaging' is about an involuntary change of maintainer
>involving
>> someone who is sufficiently active in the project not to be MIA.
>It's
>> fundamentally dif
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:20:47PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Package 'salvaging' is about an involuntary change of maintainer involving
> someone who is sufficiently active in the project not to be MIA. It's
> fundamentally different.
>
> I suspect it's constitutionally sufficient for the T
On August 5, 2018 7:41:41 AM UTC, Tobias Frost wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 06:50:28AM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>
>> Since it's explicitly in the Debian constitution that the TC is the
>> decider of package maintainership, how does a dev-ref change overcome
>> that?
>>
>
>Yes, the TC
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 06:50:28AM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> Since it's explicitly in the Debian constitution that the TC is the
> decider of package maintainership, how does a dev-ref change overcome
> that?
>
Yes, the TC has the power to decide ultimately about maintainership when
ther
On August 5, 2018 6:17:12 AM UTC, Tobias Frost wrote:
>Hello everyone,
>
>tl;dr: at the BoF the proposal seems to be uncontroversial at the
>session. So we will go forward with discussing it and propose a patch
>to e.g dev-ref (if we're still aiming for dev-ref then)
>
>Generally, the people a
Hello everyone,
tl;dr: at the BoF the proposal seems to be uncontroversial at the
session. So we will go forward with discussing it and propose a patch
to e.g dev-ref (if we're still aiming for dev-ref then)
Generally, the people at the BoF seemed to be supportive of the
proposal, but a few thin
9 matches
Mail list logo
