| 1 |
On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Daniel Campbell <zlg@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> (Targeting one specific comment here) |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On 10/03/2016 11:04 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 5 |
>> [snip] |
| 6 |
>> Ultimately if you want to rejoin Gentoo you're going to have to |
| 7 |
>> convince either Comrel or the Council that you're not going to create |
| 8 |
>> trouble. |
| 9 |
>> [snip] |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Are you speaking for William's specific situation, or in general? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I am speaking for the general situation where a developer wants to |
| 14 |
return to Gentoo after having been removed as a result of Comrel |
| 15 |
action (or with pending Comrel action from the sound of things here, |
| 16 |
again I don't have the details personally but am going from what has |
| 17 |
been publicly posted here). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Additionally, it appears that rejoining devs are merely treated like new |
| 21 |
> devs. Or at least, *should* be[3]: |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
They are, when there weren't Comrel concerns from the last time they were devs. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Given the above, I have to question the validity of Comrel's involvement |
| 28 |
> and ask why things that (allegedly?) happened eight years ago are still |
| 29 |
> relevant. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Since I don't know the details of what happened eight years ago I |
| 32 |
couldn't comment. Neither could anybody on Comrel who does know what |
| 33 |
happened eight years ago since they're bound by the privacy rules. |
| 34 |
Presumably Comrel would decide if those things are relevant, and if a |
| 35 |
candidate developer disagreed with them they could appeal to the |
| 36 |
Council. From what I've seen in the public comments and discussion |
| 37 |
the concerns at this point have nothing to do with what happened eight |
| 38 |
years ago, but the recent reactions to bringing them up. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
> As a case study, who else has had to appeal Comrel or the |
| 41 |
> Council to rejoin Gentoo? |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
I doubt that anybody could give you the "who" if there was anybody, |
| 44 |
again due to privacy. They could speak to how many, and I can say |
| 45 |
that I've seen all of two Comrel-related appeals in the entire time |
| 46 |
I've been on Council (which is a few years now), and none from |
| 47 |
prospective devs. So, I imagine this is pretty rare. There aren't |
| 48 |
many devs who have been kicked out in general, and I imagine only a |
| 49 |
small fraction attempt to return. Very few even appeal being kicked |
| 50 |
out in the first place. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> I think organizationally that each project deserves equal scrutiny into |
| 54 |
> its workings and whether or not they are improving Gentoo as a whole. |
| 55 |
> That includes Comrel and arguably *any* project within Gentoo, imo. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
Hence the reason I opened the discussion threads on aspects of how |
| 59 |
Comrel operates... |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
> As usual, this is just my two cents, offered only because I hope I would |
| 63 |
> not be treated this way if I were to come back to Gentoo after leaving. |
| 64 |
> (That said, I have no current plans of leaving Gentoo. It's just |
| 65 |
> something to think about.) Thanks for reading. |
| 66 |
> |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
Devs who leave without pending Comrel complaints are not subject to |
| 69 |
any unusual process when they return, as far as I'm aware. Devs who |
| 70 |
had complaints just need to work with Comrel, and the fact that they |
| 71 |
had a past issue is not generally disclosed unless they choose to |
| 72 |
start a mailing list thread on the topic... |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
-- |
| 75 |
Rich |
Archives