Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Raymond Jennings <shentino@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Comrel Improvements: Expectations of Privacy
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 19:57:11
Message-Id: 1475524626.7361.7@smtp.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Comrel Improvements: Expectations of Privacy by "William L. Thomson Jr."
1 I think the fact that this post about comrel wound up stirring up angry
2 hurt feelings from the past is evidence that there may have been some
3 serious errors in the past.
4
5 I would at least like to see that this sort of mistake doesn't happen
6 again.
7
8 William's appeal, though apparently meritorious, might be off topic to
9 this general discussion about comrel policy?
10
11 Ok, so the issues I see so far
12
13 * William was apparently never notified of the ban from nfp
14
15 Solution: When someone is banned from any venue, they are notified by
16 some sort of official means. NOBODY should be surprised after the
17 fact, especially if comrel intends to enforce consequences with
18 suspending developer privileges in the event of a breach.
19
20 If this is not already the case, it should be.
21
22 I would propose:
23
24 - When someone has been removed or blocked or banned, and they are a
25 gentoo developer, in addition to the enforcement measures, there should
26 be an email sent to the developer's @gentoo address or some other means
27 of communication that is registered.
28
29 - If this notification is not issued, then comrel should not suspend
30 people for violating the ban if they didn't know about it.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] Comrel Improvements: Expectations of Privacy "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@××××××.com>