[aur-general] TU Removal - Bob Finch

w9ya w9ya at qrparci.net
Fri Dec 19 01:23:18 EST 2008


In fact Daenyth did NOT place my packages into the AUR after removing them
from the binary repo. I have the transcripts from the TU irc channel where
we discussed this very thing. But this remains a reliance on a detail that
CANNOT have *any* bearing since a TU has the right to remove a package or
PKGBUILD that they contribute. Your focusing on such minute details as a
basis for your proposal is troubling. ANY action you took based on this
remains troubling. Not just now but into the future.

Your calling for my removal while you knew I am preparing my resignation
remains in poor taste. You could have sent me an email and asked what was
going on when you were told I was planning to leave, as this was hardly a
secret. ONLY you are blame for any decision to not communicate despite your
protestations below.

Thanks for wishing me well.

Bob Finch

On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:

> w9ya wrote:
>> Allan;
>> A - Your attempt to make my pending resignation something to be decided by
>> a vote has succeeded in validating, in the simplest of examples, my belief
>> that the TU system is in the process of deteriorating.
>> Allan, a resignation should ALWAYS be treated with the utmost respect. It
>> should NOT be subject to a vote as it is a personal and NOT a group
>> decision. It should never be cheapened with what you attempt below, more
>> especially since you could have easily waited a day, as others were willing
>> to do, for my resignation.
> So where did you post that your resignation would be coming in a day?  I do
> not have psychic abilities.  Your packages were removed from [community] 13
> days ago so it seems you had plenty of time.  I was not intending to cheapen
> your resignation, I was calling for your removal which is a group decision
> and does required a vote.
>  B - Your unilaterally removing my access without this vote having taken
>> place first was NOT your decision to make. Because;
>> As you correctly say below; any TU currently has a right to remove
>> anything he contributes. Nothing more than exactly this has taken place so
>> far. There are no security issues or personal issues that concern either you
>> or any other TU as relates to ANYTHING I or Daenyth have done in preparation
>> for my resignation.
>> C - I actually deleted NO PKGBUILDs from the AUR as your email below
>> indicates, but rather asked for the removal of my contributions to (only)
>> the binary repo which Daenyth's told you earlier today in a public email.
> Any packages removed from [community] should go into the AUR.  That has
> been well established over the years.  In fact, look at the script Daenyth
> posted which did that job for you and you will notice that it automatically
> uploaded the packages to the AUR.  A TU has the right to remove packages
> from [community] and delete them from the AUR but I really don't think valid
> reasons for a TU to delete packages from the AUR extends to "I contributed
> them".
> Quoting Daneyth's email...  "he deleted any in unsupported that he had
> made".  Given the packages were uploaded to the AUR during their removal
> from [community] and those packages were no longer in the AUR, I am left to
> conclude that you were removing them from the AUR, which I considered a
> security issue, hence the call for your removal.  Removing peoples access
> when they are resigning or being removed is standard practice in IT, so
> either way, I feel my removal of your access was justified.
> I wish you well with you ham-radio spin-off distro/repo and thank you for
> the contributions you did make to the TU group.
> Regards,
> Allan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20081218/30d4b11e/attachment.htm>

More information about the aur-general mailing list