[aur-general] removal proposal for Ranguvar

[Laurent Carlier]

2010/12/2 Ray Rashif <schiv at archlinux.org>

> On 3 December 2010 06:47, Lukas Fleischer <archlinux at cryptocrack.de>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 12:06:25AM +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> >> Ranguvar has been added in our team no more than last year.
> >>
> >> Conform bylaws a motion should be sent and two active TUs and a
> >> voting procedure should follow after 7 days of discussion.
> >>
> >> Here are my reasons:
> >>
> >> 1) i noticed in January he doesn't have an account on our devel
> >> panel, i asked him to send all the infos to get one and he replied
> >> that he doesn't need one because none of his packages are suitable
> >> for community. Replying to his email i encourage to get one and
> >> adopt some packages from community. At that time we have ~700
> >> orphans and i haven't got any replies from him.
> >>
> >> 2) no commits in community since the addition.
> >>
> >> 3) he's not marked as inactive and conform bylaws this proposal
> >> doesn't have sense. Quoting:
> >>
> >> "There is one special case for removal, removal due to unwarranted
> >> and undeclared inactivity, for which standard voting procedure
> >> deviates from the above."
> >>
> >> I'm waiting to see your replies and then act based on them.
> >
> > This is kinda sad to hear, but given the complete (and undeclared)
> > inactivity, I'd agree.
>
> Yeah. At first I thought it was a normal inactivity issue. But then
> Ionut made me aware that he doesn't even have an account. That was
> awkward.
>
> Anyway, he doesn't appear to have the time. So I say it's best he's
> removed for now. He can apply again after 3 months if by that time he
> wants to start contributing.
>

It make sense to start a removal procedure: no activities, no votes.