Re: [aur-general] even and elasticdog status?

On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 1:11 AM, Andrea Scarpino <andrea@archlinux.org> wrote:

On 01/11/2009, Chris Brannon <cmbrannon79@gmail.com> wrote:

...

-1.  There's only one condition under which I'd vote to remove somebody: *intentional harm* to the distro.

But FWIW, Elasticdog recently sent a post to the ML stating that he was inactive. No problem if they are inactive. Everyone can be busy. But they should flagged theirself as inactive. We have a TU Bylaws[1] that speak up.

[1] http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html

-- Andrea `bash` Scarpino Arch Linux Developer

http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2009-May/004850.html