Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-project <gentoo-project@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] A GLEP for ComRel?
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 19:18:31
Message-Id: CAGfcS_kQB37XYgAA84bOmdFR38tfGHn6YLCZBSPKPinTSQcMCQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] A GLEP for ComRel? by Matthew Thode
1 On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 12:24 PM Matthew Thode
2 <prometheanfire@g.o> wrote:
3 >
4 > I'm sure there are times where action may be
5 > needed but what it sounds like is needed are more genral definitions of
6 > what the relationship between groups should be (how to hand off a high
7 > priority item for review/action).
8
9 IMO the scope of each is fairly clear-cut, and the few times we've had
10 to interact we already have a comrel liason on Proctors. We really
11 only escalate serious repeat offenses/etc, and that basically just
12 involves sending them a complaint (much as any dev might), and
13 referencing what data we have (which is all public anyway, since
14 Proctors only deals with specific incidents that happen in public, and
15 not interpersonal issues in general). There will never be a case
16 where a Comrel issue would get referred to Proctors, unless it was
17 just misdirected from the start. If that were the case we'd just have
18 them assign us a bug/etc or otherwise ping us.
19
20 No harm in writing that down I suppose, but I'm not sure it is worth
21 it since I don't see this particular aspect of either group as
22 contentious. Neither group really has special standing with the other
23 - when we refer issues to Comrel they basically go into a black hole
24 as far as we're concerned - it would be between that dev and Comrel,
25 since it wouldn't be a personal conflict issue from our standpoint.
26 We could continue to take action on future incidents like we always
27 would, and we don't have discretion to do permanent bans/etc. If
28 Comrel issued a long-term ban then there would be no further incidents
29 for us to deal with.
30
31 While I'm not opposed to a single GLEP for Comrel plus Proctors (or
32 maybe even lump QA in there - there are potentially some common
33 elements like confirming leads), I'm not sure if that actually makes
34 things simpler. IMO Comrel is more about dealing with people, and
35 Proctors is more about dealing with their specific posts/etc without
36 passing judgment on the individuals long-term fit in the community.
37 Proctors actions are definitely not intended to be punitive even if
38 they're bans - it is more about cooling down, bringing attention to
39 the CoC, and so on, and all bans are relatively short and
40 auto-reinstated with no further follow-up. We also generally have
41 been avoiding being ban-heavy (well, aside from that spam a while ago)
42 and I'd like to see guidelines published further explaining our goals.
43
44 --
45 Rich

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] A GLEP for ComRel? Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>