[aur-general] Enforcing TU Bylaws

[Vesa Kaihlavirta]

We continued this with Callan aka wizzo on IRC. I'll summarize, without the
gnashing of teeth and pieces that incriminate me^W^W^W^W^W other fluff.

<vegai> I was looking for that Roman's mail you mentioned.
<wizzo> http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2007-December/006387.html
<vegai> thanks.
<vegai> Ok, that certainly is a problem.
<vegai> although it doesn't remove from the point that voting for new TUs is
largely pointless
<wizzo> why?
<vegai> you didn't seem to reply my mail fully
<vegai> especially the part,
<vegai> We simply cannot protect ourselves fully
<vegai> from cases like that, since the one and only way to know if a person
is
<vegai> worth anything is to give that person a chance to work and see what
happens
<vegai> in half a year.
<vegai>
<vegai> by this I don't mean letting xterminus hang on for that long
<vegai> but that when we get new people in, there's no way to know ahead of
time if they're good or not
<vegai> i.e. whether they'll take 1000 packages and go or not
<wizzo> ok I interpreted your email wrong, I apologize
<vegai> could we have seen that when he applied?
<wizzo> of course not
<vegai> so what is the point of voting?
<wizzo> I understand we always run that risk, we can't stop it
<wizzo> because it gives us all a say in what happens
<wizzo> getting a sponsor is normally a good indicator that you can make
packages
<wizzo> the vote is so everyone can give their say on it
<wizzo> I think people who just vote yes without looking at the applicant's
packages is just as bad as not voting at all anyway
<wizzo> but that's not easy to stop
<vegai> also, it seems that a mailing list is not a very reliable medium for
this
<vegai> since 3 of my previous votes were lost
<vegai> dunno what would be.
<vegai> perhaps there should be a TU application somewhere for all these
things
<vegai> not try to tweak something existing to poorly support what we need,
but something we create specifically
<vegai> can I/should I post this to the ML?
<wizzo> I agree with what you're saying but I think this need some further
discussion with more people than just us

I suppose the two new things that came from there are

  1) TU voting. Is it pointless in its current form? Are we pretty much
reduced to rubber stamps in those elections?
  2) Are our tools lacking? Are we willing to create and maintain additional
infrastructure specifically designed for TU activities?

( 3) wizzo agrees with what I'm saying   :)

Also, I think we agreed on that no active TU should feel they should leave
because of this thing.

--vk vegai
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20071221/45586795/attachment.htm>