1 |
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 01:35:15AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 19:54:01 -0400 Jon Portnoy <avenj@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> | No, mostly it does a lot to accomplish castrating devrel and making |
4 |
> | it ineffective. |
5 |
> | |
6 |
> | We have a working council now, that means if somebody feels devrel |
7 |
> | is acting unfairly or not being open enough there's a body to appeal |
8 |
> | to. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> So you are aiming for a trigger-happy devrel that tries its hardest to |
11 |
> kick off anyone it feels like, whilst relying upon the council to keep |
12 |
> it honest? |
13 |
|
14 |
No, I am aiming for a rational devrel structure instead of just adding |
15 |
three million layers of red tape that don't accomplish anything. |
16 |
|
17 |
As usual you'd like to spin it as devrel runs around suspending people |
18 |
left and right and needs to be on a short leash; we've had very few |
19 |
incidents requiring disciplinary action and it's never been taken |
20 |
lightly. |
21 |
|
22 |
I don't really care either way, I'm not actively involved in devrel |
23 |
anymore and it's just not my problem, but I'd rather not see it made |
24 |
ineffective because a few people are scared devrel might bring the |
25 |
hammer down for their behavior. |
26 |
|
27 |
-- |
28 |
Jon Portnoy |
29 |
avenj/irc.freenode.net |
30 |
-- |
31 |
gentoo-devrel@g.o mailing list |