| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA512 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 08/14/2011 02:14 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: |
| 5 |
> Markos Chandras schrieb: |
| 6 |
>> On 08/14/2011 01:19 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> Markos Chandras schrieb: |
| 8 |
>>>> Hi, |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>>> This is the second item I would like to discuss for the next |
| 11 |
>>>> Council agenda ( or a later one ) |
| 12 |
>>>> |
| 13 |
>>>> Quite a few of you know that Council acts as a court in case a |
| 14 |
>>>> developer has unresolved disputes with Devrel or when he is |
| 15 |
>>>> not happy with a Devrel's decision. The problem is that having |
| 16 |
>>>> the same people in the Council and in Devrel makes no sense |
| 17 |
>>>> since the same people will vote twice on that matter. A |
| 18 |
>>>> developer who wants to appeal to Council, seeks a review of his |
| 19 |
>>>> case and a fresh voting from new people. However, having devrel |
| 20 |
>>>> members, which are already biased based on the previous |
| 21 |
>>>> decision, makes the "Council's court role" a moot role :) |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>>> I have to ask the same here as for the other proposal: |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>>> Why do you restrict your proposal to a specific project? The |
| 26 |
>>> issue you are pointing at is the same for any other project, |
| 27 |
>>> where someone does open an appeal to council to vote on a team |
| 28 |
>>> decision he does not want to accept. |
| 29 |
>> |
| 30 |
>> I don't follow. I thought disputes were handled this way |
| 31 |
>> |
| 32 |
>> 1) Contact the guy and resolve the issue with him without bothering |
| 33 |
>> the rest of team members 2) Ask team lead 3) Ask devrel 4) Ask |
| 34 |
>> Council |
| 35 |
>> |
| 36 |
>> There is no way to go from 2->4 without devrel's involvement. |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> So lets try with an example: |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> A dev wants to join the Sunrise project and i as the lead say no to |
| 41 |
> him. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> This means, both 1 and 2 are already done, 3 does not seem reasonable |
| 44 |
> to me, since it looks unlikely to me, that DevRel could/should force |
| 45 |
> a team to accept a new member, which would end with the last point. |
| 46 |
> And if both sides keep their point, council could either force his |
| 47 |
> addition, which will usually mean, that the team lead leaves or |
| 48 |
> accept the decision of the team lead. |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
I don't think Council is eligible to force this. The council is not |
| 52 |
supposed to interfere with how teams operate. |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
- -- |
| 55 |
Regards, |
| 56 |
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 |
| 57 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 58 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJOR9DCAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LC2dwQAJkEpCiOzd1TfwoeT1bGMs8j |
| 61 |
AHgBrR/pnn5UmvcshPI0AiCj/7wBwSpNWcTCjP2Zrw+RFI6diClIevCKn2kOiqYM |
| 62 |
S84/ajIbeQa6VgEfxsnwLJ7nFIHIym71PMzyJWzDO36A6I+YsOA8HPmoBpQ2ChgU |
| 63 |
By8zTDMI2dxYaPGb59Ul3wsXbOpK1Pb1XAWxFvejLzKJQ0Zazm9JiyNjZfEutx/e |
| 64 |
3W7gI6o7vVHI6a+/oCYnBFx8MmEk+mxjqK0VVhnGuYDJhYOj53T2C1Capxi22jY+ |
| 65 |
JGui99yzh1gpufFYl7gMuKa+3kOtGYYFl5CHA+NI3N0OtB2KeOVtukWOJJKPlyj7 |
| 66 |
S4ScuQdYrmMENRMkeGuib9XGYj1GKK12FriZle+WNXvADzcM0rle17Hu/8PWQzvt |
| 67 |
LLonJWYQDKQZOoj+WX8zXEEBIHumhHM+qQYpmHYYhzQl8Y6REYXIUKgHg0lw65iw |
| 68 |
XyMs2fUknlaSWZAalve3aSfv+uzO3+bYyMff1TvU04uIye59ha0SeI/GlDqDhufx |
| 69 |
CJ6WeJDTpTg9LQwds1RNKnnh63P5wRJ1WYEIAWGYOKYm2blStMVuSd9X6dybwp8G |
| 70 |
xC5R/wcAliV88NpphlpAOlsBErJbixE5MUNgRhMLYbyhFTHZgOXrdL3GsRiaTnHY |
| 71 |
V6b8hANLDEBlUvEIljH+ |
| 72 |
=QSxN |
| 73 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives