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

Re: Bug#224742 acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#224742: Related to this issue...)

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

[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

Reply to: