1 |
Hi, everyone. |
2 |
|
3 |
Since we currently don't explicitly indicate the appeal procedure |
4 |
for Undertaker actions, I'd like to propose adding the following to our |
5 |
wiki page. |
6 |
|
7 |
TL;DR: Potential retirements can be appealed <1 mo before execution (or |
8 |
post execution), with ComRel being the first appeal instance, |
9 |
and Council being the second. |
10 |
|
11 |
|
12 |
Full proposed policy, with rationale: |
13 |
|
14 |
1. Both pending and past retirements can be appealed to ComRel. |
15 |
The ComRel decision can be further appealed to the Council. |
16 |
|
17 |
R: ComRel is a parent project for Undertakers, so it seems reasonable to |
18 |
make it the first appeal instance. |
19 |
|
20 |
|
21 |
2. Pending retirements can be appealed no earlier than one month before |
22 |
planned execution date (i.e. no earlier than after receiving third- |
23 |
mail). |
24 |
|
25 |
R: This is meant to prevent premature appeals while Undertakers would |
26 |
not retire the developer anyway (e.g. due to new activity). Undertakers |
27 |
recheck activity while sending third mail, so that's a good point to |
28 |
confirm that someone's retirement is still pending. |
29 |
|
30 |
|
31 |
3. Throughout the appeal process, the pending retirement is suspended. |
32 |
If the appeal occurs post retirement, the developer remains retired |
33 |
throughout the appeal process. The appeal process is finished if |
34 |
either: |
35 |
|
36 |
a. the Council issues final decision, |
37 |
|
38 |
b. the ComRel decision is not appealed further within 7 days, |
39 |
|
40 |
c. both sides agree not to appeal further. |
41 |
|
42 |
R: We obviously want to avoid ping-pong of retiring, then unretiring |
43 |
(then maybe retiring again). |
44 |
|
45 |
|
46 |
4. The appeal process is meant to resolve disagreements between |
47 |
Undertakers and developers. It is not a replacement for communicating |
48 |
with Undertakers. |
49 |
|
50 |
R: We don't want people to appeal everything without even trying to |
51 |
resolve it between us. For example, if we missed something, then you |
52 |
should tell us rather than calling for appeal. However, if we do |
53 |
disagree on whether something counts as sufficient activity, this is |
54 |
something you can appeal. |
55 |
|
56 |
|
57 |
5. The appeal process resolves each case individually based on existing |
58 |
policies. While it may influence future policies, those need to be |
59 |
carried out via appropriate policy making channels. |
60 |
|
61 |
R: In other words, appeals don't change policies silently. If a policy |
62 |
needs to be changed, it must follow proper channel with ml review. |
63 |
|
64 |
|
65 |
WDYT? |
66 |
|
67 |
-- |
68 |
Best regards, |
69 |
Michał Górny |