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

Expulsion of Andres, GR against expulsion process





When you start an expulsion process with such a poor rationale, it's
pretty obvious it's going to fail. 2 small IRC logs do not constitute
a rationale for starting this process. Starting an expulsion process
against someone working in the same team is a strong indication that
the problem isn't as important as an expulsion would warrant, and that
the said team just can't deal with its internal problems.
I don't see why this would be the case. If you would be in the kernel team, would you keep yourself from suggesting dilinger's expulsion...because you would be in his team? More importantly, what would you do if someone in your teams happened to have problems with social behavior beyond what's acceptable...after trying to moderate that person had too limited effect? Keep in mind that in the kernel team's case at least, just making everyone but one person leave the team would certainly harm the kernel's quality too much.

Fact is, quite a few people, including myself, are working with Sven
and have good relations with him, be it for Debian-related work or
not. He's indeed easier to deal with IRL, but that's not an excuse for
not trying harder to deal with him on the lists/IRC. DDs traditionally
have strong opinions on technical subjects, Sven is no exception.

Sven is very competent and knowledgeable, especially when it comes to
PowerPC. He is a valuable DD, and his expulsion would really be a loss
for the Project.
I suspected that your original reply was in support of Sven and not just a reaction against trying to expulse anyone, but this was really not clear. Thanks for clarifying, this part of the mail I'm replying to is certainly what dilinger tried to generate (although he probably expected to hear the opposite opinion).


So, this expulsion process looks more like a good way to hurt Sven
than anything else. If it fails (hint: it will) Andres will be kind of
singled-out, and this whole thing will turn into "I can't bear this
guy, please kick him out".

In the meantime, we are wasting precious DD and DAM time to satisfy
Andres' need for a revenge on Sven.
This loops back to your original reply, which seems to exclude any possibility other than Andres being evil or Sven being evil, ignoring the possibility that Andres did an honest error trying to benefit the Project if the process fails.

The failure of this process means "we're not kicking Sven out, you'll
have to work together". Both Sven and Andres will have to cope with
that in whatever way, which may include leaving the Project.


My statement was expressing this: getting singled-out as Andres will
get once this process will have officially failed is a strong
indication that maybe, just maybe, you'd better leave now.
Yet, if this process fails, Sven and Jonas will have to work together. Perhaps not as much as Sven and Andres as kernel team members, but that depends on whether Andres resumes his activities in that team. If Andres keeps from getting involved (as usual) again in the kernel team, the potential for conflicts should be similar to the one between Sven and Jonas. Before Andres started the expulsion procedure, it looked like Sven and Jonas would stay in the same project, so I don't see why it's impossible to picture that Andres and Sven would stay in the same project too.


I consider this whole thing as a harsh and rude way to badly hurt
Sven, and he doesn't deserve that. He's the second DD to suffer from
this process, and at this point I am seriously considering a GR to
withdraw the whole expulsion process as decided by the DAMs. To date,
it has done more harm than good.

As someone else said, this expulsion request should not even have
passed the DAM.
It's a bit strange that you blame the expulsion process in the same message you say you think it's going to fail, but I also doubt that such a GR would be a good idea. I'll let you go ahead instead of commenting at this point though.


I essentially agree with Daniel's reply.



Reply to: