[aur-general] REMOVAL: Discussion Period for sergej
Firmicus at gmx.net
Thu Jan 17 03:14:50 EST 2008
> 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
> > 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
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
> 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.
More information about the aur-general