On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 04:41:03PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Furthermore, I find it rather disquieting that the maintainer's last > > argument in the BTS logs is an appeal to his own authority as BTS > > owner and a threat to block the reporter's access to the BTS unless he > > stops wishing for the feature he wishes: > > I'm happy to do the same thing for any other maintainer who is being > attacked by someone who's trying to use the BTS reopen command to force > a maintainer to do things against their better judgement. Perhaps it would be wise for the BTS admins to adopt a policy of individual members recusing themselves from acting in their administrative capacity with respect to a bug whose status is under dispute, or with the people involved in such disputes. In the U.S., for instance, Supreme Court justices recuse themselves from cases where there may be a perceived conflict of interest; for instance, when one of the parties before the Court is a corporation in whom a justice holds shares of stock. (I proposed another policy regarding the handling of perceived BTS abuse a couple of months ago[1], but I don't know if my suggestions have been adopted.) [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-debbugs/2003/debian-debbugs-200310/msg00002.html -- G. Branden Robinson | If you make people think they're Debian GNU/Linux | thinking, they'll love you; but if branden@debian.org | you really make them think, they'll http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | hate you. -- Don Marquis
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature