| 1 |
On Tuesday, October 11, 2016 5:59:38 PM EDT Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
> >>>>> On Tue, 11 Oct 2016, William L Thomson wrote: |
| 3 |
> >> There were only two changes with regards to content after inception |
| 4 |
> >> of the CoC: One in 2008, replacing proctors by devrel und userrel |
| 5 |
> >> (bug 185572), |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > I was not aware comrel and userrel were created in 2008. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Both projects are much older. The timing relates to the dissolution of |
| 10 |
> the proctors project, see the 2007-07-12 council meeting log. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Yes but per that bug it seems most the policing powers fell under Proctors and |
| 13 |
that was transferred to comrel/devrel. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Snippet from bug 185572 |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
"If the problem repeats itself, there are various options open to the |
| 18 |
proctors, including temporary or permanent suspension of a person's ability to |
| 19 |
post to mailing lists, removal of Bugzilla access, or in more severe cases |
| 20 |
suspension of developer privileges. Any action of this sort will require |
| 21 |
consensus from at least three proctors. " |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=185572 |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
It is quite clear that prior to ~2007-2008, punishment was handled by Proctors |
| 26 |
not comrel/devrel/userrel. The last bit about requiring consensus is |
| 27 |
interesting. I do not recall reading such about devrel/comrel but may exist. |
| 28 |
Clearly comrel can act individually and people must request a vote from all... |
| 29 |
Proctors never seemed to operate that way. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Also interesting how proctors could not be on council ( or vice versa ), but |
| 32 |
that has never been the case for comrel/devrel... |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> > Timing is quite interesting. That could explain quite allot, and why |
| 35 |
> > at least in my opinion. Gentoo has been on the decline since ~2008. |
| 36 |
> > I do not feel either has had a good or positive impact. The issues |
| 37 |
> > in Gentoo could be directly related. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> Since the premise is wrong, this doesn't follow. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Actually it is does given powers were transferred from one entity to another. |
| 42 |
I never recall hearing issues from the Proctors. Seems comrel/devrel concept |
| 43 |
has not worked since its inception. Or at least since Proctors was merged into |
| 44 |
or taken over by other entities. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives