On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 05:44:32PM +0100, Leslie P. Polzer wrote:
Actually one of the main points of this discussion is exactly this. I have read a lot of people saying "no way Sergej is able to maintain this" -- of course without being able to prove it, as the current situation shows rather that he *can* maintain this.
Leslie
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 05:45:30PM +0900, Callan Barrett wrote:
~70 of your packages are missing licenses. ~440 are missing either a maintainer tag of contributor tag. ~550 are missing a maintainer tag.
Given the amount of packages that did not follow the guidelines, I beg to differ. You wouldn't maintain 600 packages would you? And you most definitely would not like to take a share (~20) of those packages if Sergej was to disappear. This isn't the main reason why this discussion was started. It was due to Sergej not voting.
There is one special case for removal, removal due to unwarranted and undeclared inactivity, for which standard voting procedure deviates from the above. This motion is also automatically triggered by repeated quorum offenses, as described in the Quorum subsection of this document. For this special case, SVP is followed with a discussion period of three days, a quorum of 66%, and a voting period of 5 days.