Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal
Raphael Hertzog <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Anthony Towns <email@example.com> writes:
>> > * multiple Debian developers have requested the individual's
>> > removal for non-spurious reasons; eg, due to problematic
>> > uploads, unfixed bugs, or being unreasonably difficult to
>> > work with.
>> This part is broken and shouldn't end up in a final proposal. We need to
>> decide on actual rules, otherwise this can lead to endless flamewars.
> We take non-binary decisions every day (MIA, hijack, etc.). This is just
> one more of those. Usually it's pretty clear when someone isn't up to the
> If you have some concrete rules, I'd be happy to discuss them, but
> at this point I don't think that concrete rules would help (age of RC
> bugs? bug severities can be discussed, changed. only 3 maintaineres
> unhappy instead of the 4 required? what if those 3 are the Gnome
> maintainers and the package is a Gnome one?).
The concrete rule is in the next paragraph:
* the Debian Account Managers have requested the individual's
removal for any reason.
So those multiple DDs just approach the DAMs which make the decision.
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)