[aur-general] REMOVAL: Discussion Period for sergej

[Darwin Bautista]

On Jan 16, 2008 4:45 PM, Callan Barrett <wizzomafizzo at gmail.com> wrote:
> sergej, this officially marks the discussion period for your removal
> as a Trusted User.
>
> For weeks now it's come to my attention many times your attitude as a
> Trusted User as well as the attention of several other people and I'm
> surprised it hasn't been brought up earlier, I'm going to list the
> reasons I believe you're no longer fit to be a Trusted User and I want
> you to defend yourself on these points:
>
> * You have neglected voting long enough to be brought up for removal,
> even longer if you do not vote again in the next 2 days, and when you
> do vote it is only just "acceptable".
> * You currently maintain 602 packages in the community repo:
>   - This is an insane amount of packages by any standard and yet you
> keep adopting more for no apparent reason other than to bump your
> package count, not many of them have a high vote count so why is this?
> You're not helping out by adopting packages when you can't maintain
> them properly.
>   - It's possible for me to pick out almost any package at random that
> you maintain and find something that goes against arch packaging
> standards such as missing maintainer tags, missing licenses and some
> of the weirdest build functions I've ever seen, it's as if you adopt
> these packages straight out of unsupported without checking them at
> all.
>   - The fact you don't bother with licenses has already become an
> issue, as I pointed out recently on the ML (which you did not even
> reply to) you had packaged smf *illegally*. Furthermore you leave
> licenses blank, add bogus licenses such as "unknown" or don't add a
> license variable at all, this is obviously not good enough.

Just a thought, the 'unknown' 'license' is actually in the Arch packaging HOWTO:
"license: The type of license, if you do not know it please write down
'unknown'."

> * Aside from voting occasionally your contribution to discussions are
> very few, part of being a TU is the community aspect and I know you're
> not the only person who does this.
>
> ~70 of your packages are missing licenses.
> ~440 are missing either a maintainer tag of contributor tag.
> ~550 are missing a maintainer tag.
>
> I think you have too many packages for anybody to maintain properly
> which seems to be the cause of your neglect towards them and I can't
> think up any justifiable reason that you adopt so many in the first
> place. I want you to reply to this thread so you can hopefully justify
> your actions but to be honest I see no reason why you should continue
> being a Trusted User with this attitude towards the job you agreed to
> when you applied.
>
> So begins the three day discussion period, I'm very interested in
> anyone's response to this issue.

-- 
Darwin M. Bautista
BS Electronics and Communications Engineering
University of the Philippines Diliman
http://www.darwin.uk.to

University of the Philippines Linux Users' Group
http://www.uplug.org