Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [PATCH v3] glep-0048: Provide clear rules for disciplinary actions
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 16:55:22
Message-Id: 20190429185514.65cc80c2@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] [PATCH v3] glep-0048: Provide clear rules for disciplinary actions by "Michał Górny"
1 On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:46:29 +0200
2 Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
3
4 [...]
5 > > [...]
6 > > > > 3) 30 days is too long. Like said, Gentoo should never be about
7 > > > > disciplinary actions but it looks like some current QA members
8 > > > > want to change that. I am against that change:
9 > > >
10 > > > Tell that to ComRel. If Proctors reduce their maximum
11 > > > disciplinary action, I will adjust the spec. Otherwise, this is
12 > > > moot point.
13 > >
14 > > What's the relation with proctors here?
15 > >
16 >
17 > This is 'inspired' by Proctors. Just like Proctors issue short-term
18 > actions for CoC violations, QA issues short-term actions for QA
19 > violations. In both cases, longer actions are deferred to ComRel.
20
21 This does not imply that the duration should be the same.