Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proctors - improve the concept or discard it?
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 23:54:34
Message-Id: 1181173670.15396.50.camel@workbox.quova.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proctors - improve the concept or discard it? by expose@luftgetrock.net
1 On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 19:16 +0200, expose@×××××××××××.net wrote:
2 > Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
3 > > I'm sure they have the best intentions but I've never seen any clear
4 > > guidelines for them. They use their best judgement what to handle and
5 > > what not to but due to language barriers, cultural differences etc. it's
6 > > difficult to judge.
7 > The guideline, as far as I understood it, was (and is?) to ban people who dont
8 > abide by the time-outs.
9
10 What guideline? Where is it? When was it approved by the Council, like
11 we had said that proctors policy would need to be?
12
13 --
14 Chris Gianelloni
15 Release Engineering Strategic Lead
16 Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
17 Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
18 Gentoo Foundation

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proctors - improve the concept or discard it? George Prowse <cokehabit@×××××.com>