[aur-general] REMOVAL: Discussion Period for sergej

[Firmicus]

> On Jan 17, 2008 7:19 AM, Callan Barrett <wizzomafizzo at gmail.com 
> <mailto:wizzomafizzo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Jan 17, 2008 7:46 AM, Firmicus <Firmicus at gmx.net
>     <mailto:Firmicus at gmx.net>> wrote:
>     >
>     > I just looked at the TU Bylaws concerning TU removal
>     > http://dev.archlinux.org/~simo/TUbylaws.html#Removal
>     <http://dev.archlinux.org/%7Esimo/TUbylaws.html#Removal>
>     > and it looks like this discussion is not yet valid, for it says that
>     >
>     > "A motion must be made by at least two active Trusted Users for
>     the removal of a Trusted
>     > User."
>     >
>     > AFAICS only one such motion has been made until now ...
>
>     The discussion period was started because of the "special case" and is
>     meant to be "automatically triggered" anyway. Keep in mind that even
>     if this discussion ends in a vote (which it looks like it won't)
>     you're free to vote no, that's why it's a vote.
>

Hmm, I should have read the last paragraph obviously :) You were 
perfectly right. Sorry for the noise.

I agree this discussion is important and necessary. I still hope we can 
resolve the issue. And for that Sergej needs to show some sign of 
cooperation.


Ronald van Haren wrote:
> For a lot of these packages I do not see any use for them being in 
> [community]. Please drop a lot of them, orphan them, put them in 
> unsupported and post a list on an announcement on bbs so at least some 
> of them get picked up. The other packages will get adopted in time 
> when somebody needs them (which is questionable seeing the amount of 
> votes). This will give you time to properly maintain your remaining 
> packages.
>
> For all other TUs looking to adopt more packages, or upcoming TUs, 
> there are enough packages with a reasonably amount of votes in 
> unsupported left to adopt. Please choose to maintain them instead of 
> packages you may use which have only a very small amount of votes. 
> Callan if you want to start a new thread about this, feel free to do 
> so this discussion does not get lost here.

I perfectly agree with the above. That was exactly the point I made in 
my first message in this thread.

F