Scripsit Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 06:49:18PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
>> That would mean that if somebody _has_ done something that merits
>> expulsion (knowingly uploading packages with trojaned backdoors in
>> them is the clearest example that comes to m
On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 06:49:18PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >> So far as I can tell, the decision to make the first message public or
> >> semi-public has been a decision taken by the people who chose to start it,
> >> not by the process, and cha
Scripsit Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> So far as I can tell, the decision to make the first message public or
>> semi-public has been a decision taken by the people who chose to start it,
>> not by the process, and changing the process isn't going to address that
>> problem (unless, I suppose
Em Seg, 2006-04-10 às 21:30 +0200, Sven Luther escreveu:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 03:51:19PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > I know that having codified expulsion procedures is tempting to use
> > them, and I do think that they are a good thing to have. But please
> > consider one thing when you
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Maybe we can convince more people to ignore such public statements unless
> the expulsion process *actually* starts (which so far as I can tell has
> yet to ever happen).
I think there have been at least two expulsion processes started,
but both have ended at ste
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 08:15:29PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The only real way to handle this, is to modify the expulsion process,
> > and to start the process not with a public or private lynching process,
> > but with a first step consisting of as
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The only real way to handle this, is to modify the expulsion process,
> and to start the process not with a public or private lynching process,
> but with a first step consisting of asking the DPL, or someone delegated
> by him, to do a private mediation p
Le Lun 10 Avril 2006 21:30, Sven Luther a écrit :
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 03:51:19PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > Dear developers,
> >
> > I know that having codified expulsion procedures is tempting to use
> > them, and I do think that they are a good thing to have. But please
> > consider o
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 03:51:19PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Dear developers,
>
> I know that having codified expulsion procedures is tempting to use
> them, and I do think that they are a good thing to have. But please
> consider one thing when you think about invoking them: [1]
As someone
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 16 Mar 2006, MJ Ray spake thusly:
> > I disagree. The candidate only seems to get that choice
> > after there are enough people gathered against them. When a
> > totally crap request collapses without getting Q supporters,
> > the request and supporters det
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Harald Geyer wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > I think the idea is that the person facing expulsion procedures
> > may not want future employers to be able to google about the
> > episode. Given that the process does fail, it would simplify matters
also sprach Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.03.19.1457 +0100]:
> It can be searched using google groups. See http://www.debian.org/Bugs/.
So a future employee can google bugs. It's probably only a question
of time until Google integrates groups with the main web search.
--
Please do not send
On Sunday 19 March 2006 14:39, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.03.19.1416
+0100]:
> > > I don't want future employers to be able to google about my bugs.
> >
> > http://bugs.debian.org/robots.txt
>
> Mh. Our bug database is also a source of informatio
also sprach Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.03.19.1416 +0100]:
> > I don't want future employers to be able to google about my bugs.
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/robots.txt
Mh. Our bug database is also a source of information... why not
index it?
--
Please do not send copies of list
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 13:32 +0100, Harald Geyer wrote:
> I don't want future employers to be able to google about my bugs.
http://bugs.debian.org/robots.txt
Thijs :)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I think the idea is that the person facing expulsion procedures
> may not want future employers to be able to google about the
> episode. Given that the process does fail, it would simplify matters
> for the individual if they did not have to try
On 16 Mar 2006, MJ Ray spake thusly:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> On 16 Mar 2006, Christoph Berg stated:
>>> I for myself would very much prefer the rumors, and maybe even
>>> publically spreading (leaking?) the word on irc than to deliver
>>> the expulsion request directly to every l
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 16 Mar 2006, Christoph Berg stated:
> > I for myself would very much prefer the rumors, and maybe even
> > publically spreading (leaking?) the word on irc than to deliver the
> > expulsion request directly to every lurking slashdot/heise/whatever
> > writer
On 16 Mar 2006, Christoph Berg stated:
> Re: Lars Wirzenius 2006-03-16
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> I disagree. Posting things to -private does not really keep them
>> secret or confidential, but it does generate a lot of
>> rumors. Rumors are usually worse than the real thing. Therefore, in
>> my hon
Re: Lars Wirzenius 2006-03-16 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I disagree. Posting things to -private does not really keep them secret
> or confidential, but it does generate a lot of rumors. Rumors are
> usually worse than the real thing. Therefore, in my honest opinion, it's
> better to keep things in the o
to, 2006-03-16 kello 15:51 +0100, Christoph Berg kirjoitti:
> I know that having codified expulsion procedures is tempting to use
> them, and I do think that they are a good thing to have. But please
> consider one thing when you think about invoking them: [1]
>
> Please use debian-private. [3]
I
Dear developers,
I know that having codified expulsion procedures is tempting to use
them, and I do think that they are a good thing to have. But please
consider one thing when you think about invoking them: [1]
Please use debian-private. [3]
The reason is simply that expulsion is not a technica
22 matches
Mail list logo
