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

Re: tb's questions for the candidates

On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 10:16:58PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> The intention of my question was a little different, however, and I
> wonder if the candidates might turn to the following for a moment:
> Are there circumstances, other than a violation of the DMUP or
> inactivity, for which a maintainer should be excluded from the
> Project?

A developer should probably be disciplined if he or she violates General
Rule 2.1.1 of the Constitution[1]: "Nothing in this constitution imposes
an obligation on anyone to do work for the Project. [...] However, they
must not actively work against these rules and decisions properly made
under them."

>  Should we think about having a process now?

I often find it easier to reason from the specific to the general than
the other way around.  Is there a particular instance of non-DMUP,
non-inactivity misconduct you had in mind?

In other words, do you perceive a concrete need for such process now?
If not, do you think we are facing an imminent or serious threat of
abuse of power on someone's part in the absense of such a process?

[1] http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution

G. Branden Robinson                |       The Bible is probably the most
Debian GNU/Linux                   |       genocidal book ever written.
branden@debian.org                 |       -- Noam Chomsky
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: