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

Re: Regaining Access to the Control Bot

On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 04:13:24AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> I've (er, unilaterally) removed this ban until such time as somebody
> explains it properly, and preferably also sets some kind of time limit
> or conditions on it.

Okay; given the apparent absence of even a loosely-defined procedure to
govern these situations, I appreciate you taking the time to look into

> I'd recommend that the glibc close/reopen war in question be handled
> better from now on. Anthony did say "contact the upstream copyright
> holder", and I think it would be a *very good idea* for somebody to do
> that instead of further use of control@bugs as a debating stick. It's
> not meant to be used that way. There's been much hand-wringing about
> what kind of contact might be suitable, but as far as I can see no
> actual *action*, so it's all moot. That's really rather disappointing
> given the amount of energy otherwise expended on this bug.

For what it's worth, I've had some private conversations with Jeff
Bailey about it.

> Also, Branden, your rants about BTS administrator accountability really
> don't help motivate us to do *anything*, frankly;

I am sorry if you were irritated, but I was not trying to rant.  I
enumerated a list of things that I think would be attributes of a good
policy for displinary action against abusers of the BTS.

> please put a lid on it. I didn't respond earlier because I was busy
> setting up a new laptop on an unfamiliar architecture, trying to sort
> out complications in my personal life, dealing with having too much to
> do at work, and preparing for my birthday. I imagine others have
> similar reasons. I can really do without the conspiracy theories.

I didn't offer any speculations as to why no one was taking action.  I
did presume that whoever put the ban in place in the first place was
somewhat disinclined to reconsider his own actions, especially since
they've come to public light.

The ban had been in place for weeks, and I've been given to understand
through private communications that other BTS admins knew *of* the ban
prior to October 22nd, when I sent my mail about it.

I do apologize if the subject has come up with a frequency that has made
you uncomfortable.  I admit that it is easier for me to put myself in
the shoes of the aggrieved party.

I am quite aware of the bold new classes of spam attack that have been
blitzing the BTS -- thanks to the very large number of open bugs
assigned to me :) -- and I completely understand if dealing with those
potentially-crippling attacks has occupied the greater part of the BTS
admins' attention.

> [Due to the aforementioned anniversary, I'm not entirely sober and it's
> late. Please excuse total lack of diplomacy.]

You shouldn't check Debian email when celebrating your birthday -- it's
all bitching and grief.  :)  Drink your Scotch and be merry.

Happy birthday, too.  :)

G. Branden Robinson                |    I'm sorry if the following sounds
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    combative and excessively personal,
branden@debian.org                 |    but that's my general style.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    -- Ian Jackson

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: