[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Renewed appeal to the technical committee about the FransAndCo.Vs.Sven dispute

Sven Luther writes ("Re: Renewed appeal to the technical committee
about the FransAndCo.Vs.Sven dispute"):
> [stuff]

I'm glad to see that I'm not on your list of `one-sided' people.  Not
that I expect you to be pleased when I tell you this: the reason all
these people are disagreeing with you isn't because they're biased.
It's because of your intolerable behaviour.

I hereby propose the following resolution:

1. We note that Sven Luther has a dispute with the debian-installer
   team; Sven feels that he should have access to the d-i svn

2. We note that the d-i team, who manage that repository, disagree.

3. Whether or not someone should be permitted commit access to a
   repository is a social and political matter.  Therefore we do not
   have the power to overrule the d-i team on this question.

4. Nevertheless, we wish to state some opinions as we are
   empowered to do by s6.1(5) of the constitution:

5. Sven:  Your behaviour leaves much to be desired.

   You should stop wasting everyone's time and energy with this
   campaign to be reinstated as a d-i committer.  Regardless of the
   merits of the original decision, by now it seems unlikely that
   anyone on the d-i team would find you a congenial colleague, and we
   can see good reasons for their decision to hold you at arm's

   Please do not contact the committee again on this matter.

6. The Project Leader should delegate (to a group rather than to an
   individual, but perhaps to an existing group or groups) mediation
   and disciplinary powers, including the power to intervene
   informally, give formal advice and reprimands, rule on social
   disputes, and take disciplinary action short of expulsion.


Reply to: