| 1 |
> On Sep 21, 2019, at 5:55 AM, James Le Cuirot <chewi@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 09:01:54 +0200 |
| 4 |
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>> Hi, everyone. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Since we currently don't explicitly indicate the appeal procedure |
| 9 |
>> for Undertaker actions, I'd like to propose adding the following to our |
| 10 |
>> wiki page. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> TL;DR: Potential retirements can be appealed <1 mo before execution (or |
| 13 |
>> post execution), with ComRel being the first appeal instance, |
| 14 |
>> and Council being the second. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> Full proposed policy, with rationale: |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> 1. Both pending and past retirements can be appealed to ComRel. |
| 20 |
>> The ComRel decision can be further appealed to the Council. |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> R: ComRel is a parent project for Undertakers, so it seems reasonable to |
| 23 |
>> make it the first appeal instance. |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> 2. Pending retirements can be appealed no earlier than one month before |
| 27 |
>> planned execution date (i.e. no earlier than after receiving third- |
| 28 |
>> mail). |
| 29 |
>> |
| 30 |
>> R: This is meant to prevent premature appeals while Undertakers would |
| 31 |
>> not retire the developer anyway (e.g. due to new activity). Undertakers |
| 32 |
>> recheck activity while sending third mail, so that's a good point to |
| 33 |
>> confirm that someone's retirement is still pending. |
| 34 |
>> |
| 35 |
>> |
| 36 |
>> 3. Throughout the appeal process, the pending retirement is suspended. |
| 37 |
>> If the appeal occurs post retirement, the developer remains retired |
| 38 |
>> throughout the appeal process. The appeal process is finished if |
| 39 |
>> either: |
| 40 |
>> |
| 41 |
>> a. the Council issues final decision, |
| 42 |
>> |
| 43 |
>> b. the ComRel decision is not appealed further within 7 days, |
| 44 |
>> |
| 45 |
>> c. both sides agree not to appeal further. |
| 46 |
>> |
| 47 |
>> R: We obviously want to avoid ping-pong of retiring, then unretiring |
| 48 |
>> (then maybe retiring again). |
| 49 |
>> |
| 50 |
>> |
| 51 |
>> 4. The appeal process is meant to resolve disagreements between |
| 52 |
>> Undertakers and developers. It is not a replacement for communicating |
| 53 |
>> with Undertakers. |
| 54 |
>> |
| 55 |
>> R: We don't want people to appeal everything without even trying to |
| 56 |
>> resolve it between us. For example, if we missed something, then you |
| 57 |
>> should tell us rather than calling for appeal. However, if we do |
| 58 |
>> disagree on whether something counts as sufficient activity, this is |
| 59 |
>> something you can appeal. |
| 60 |
>> |
| 61 |
>> |
| 62 |
>> 5. The appeal process resolves each case individually based on existing |
| 63 |
>> policies. While it may influence future policies, those need to be |
| 64 |
>> carried out via appropriate policy making channels. |
| 65 |
>> |
| 66 |
>> R: In other words, appeals don't change policies silently. If a policy |
| 67 |
>> needs to be changed, it must follow proper channel with ml review. |
| 68 |
>> |
| 69 |
>> |
| 70 |
>> WDYT? |
| 71 |
> |
| 72 |
> Thanks for noticing this gap and addressing it. Given recent events |
| 73 |
> though, we must also review the wording used in regular undertaker |
| 74 |
> correspondence and also the process, if necessary, to avoid things |
| 75 |
> getting to this point in the first place. |
| 76 |
I agree. Putting a process into place to provide order to things is a definite improvement. I am happy to see things moving in a constructive direction. |
| 77 |
|
| 78 |
That said, I want to point out that our ability to move in a constructive direction after discussion is praiseworthy. I have recently had exposure to certain other areas of the OSS community where disagreements are not handled well. I find our approach to things to be a breath of fresh air in comparison. I will refrain from naming projects, but to avoid causing misconceptions, I will say that I am not referring to any projects where I currently have more than 3 commits. |
| 79 |
> |
| 80 |
> -- |
| 81 |
> James Le Cuirot (chewi) |
| 82 |
> Gentoo Linux Developer |
Archives