Re: The Debian Maintainers GR
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <he@ftwca.de> writes:
> (i) You have added a policy for everything, but removal from the DM list
> is still under-defined. This is a crappy idea. Imagine a Sven Luther
Under-defined? It lists two criteria for "forceful" removal: request
from the DAM and request from multiple developers. OK, it doesn't say
how many are multiple, but I don't think that qualifies as
under-defined.
OK, after going back and reading your previous mail, it seems that you
want rigid rules for removal. Would you be happy if the proposal said?
"at least ten Debian developers have requested the individual's
removal for any reason"
That is a very specific rule that takes care of most every situation,
I would think (if you cannot get 10 developers to support you, you
could still try get the DAM's support), without being too easy to
abuse.
> case in DM - someone who's technically capable and invests a lot of
> time, but leads to regular flamewars. There is no question that
> we would need to have some procedure to decide what should happen
> in such cases. Now, back to the Sven Luther example: Imagine how
> *that* flamewar would look if the procedure to kick him out would
> have been hand-crafted just for his case?
I'm assuming about 10 developers would have mailed the DM Keyring
team, and I'd say 10 qualifies as "multiple". Yes, there would have
been the usual flamewar, but it wouldn't have mattered if there was a
very specific policy or not.
> (2) As soon as someone is in the DM keyring, a DD can give him
> upload rights for virtually every package by adding the DM to
> the Uploaders field and adding the DM-Upload-Allowed field.
If there is a malicious DD who wants to do that, what would stop that
DD from creating an automated system that accepts packages from the
DM, signs them and sends them into the upload queue?
--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) *
* PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer *
Reply to: