On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:49:51AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote: > Josip Rodin <joy@entuzijast.net> writes: > > + <p>The Social Committee may ask a Developer to take a particular social > > + course of action even if the Developer does not wish to; this requires > > + a 3:1 majority.</p> > > OK, what happens if the Developer doesn't take the required course of > action? With the ctte it is easy, somebody does an NMU, but I don't > see how you can do something similar in social situations. Begin a member of the Debian project is a privilege. In the US, having a drivers license is also a privilege. If you do something wrong, the can be given a 'warning', you can have 'points' added to your driving record, you can be temporarily suspended, etc. In most cases, there may be a person in the project to continue work on a persons package or even a maintainer outside the project who can be sponsored to continue work. So a persons work on a package can be restricted if someone wished. I could site a certain person who shall be nameless as an example. But there is a certain reluctance to do this in a volunteer project because you'd be restricing someone's volunteer time activity which is something that has a certain scarcity to it and not to be wasted. Not to mention the effect it could have on their future participation. So when is Debian willing to take any action in regards to limiting someones involvment? It seems certain volunteer organization like say the Red Cross have a clearer idea of this. Debian less so. -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/| | `. `' Operating System | go to counter.li.org and | | `- http://www.debian.org/ | be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: subkeys.pgp.net | my NPO: cfsg.org |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature