[aur-general] trusted users business

[Ionuț Bîru]

On 07/16/2010 02:15 AM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 00:12 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
>> On 16.07.2010 00:08, Ranguvar wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:40, Isaac Dupree
>>> <ml at isaac.cedarswampstudios.org>  wrote:
>>>> On 07/15/10 12:57, Angel Velásquez wrote:
>>>>> Quoting the TU Bylaws Quote section:
>>>>>
>>>>> "This section deals with quorums, and the consequences for those that
>>>>> repeatedly keep the group from meeting them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Quorums were established to make sure that all TUs are having a say in
>>>>> the matters that they vote on, and to ensure that TUs remain active in
>>>>> the job that they have taken on. All active TUs should be
>>>>> participating in discussions and voting procedures in order to
>>>>> continue meeting the quorums.
>>>>> **For this reason, active TUs that keep quorum from being established
>>>>> on a voting procedure for three consecutive voting procedures (they
>>>>> need not be on the same motion) are automatically brought up for
>>>>> removal procedure, by reason of unwarranted inactivity. **"
>>>>>
>>>>> ...So IMO we should start a removalprocedure...
>>>> AFAICT, no vote-quorums have actually failed to be established in recent
>>>> history, so the above automatic-removal (**For this reason...**) clause does
>>>> not apply.  (The general activity-guidelines found above it might, though.)
>>>>
>>>> -Isaac
>>>>
>>> I apologize for not voting in the past several TU elections.
>>> I've been a little distracted from Arch TU duties, but resolve to pay
>>> more attention to the mailing list in the future.
>>> Currently I'm on vacation in California, but I'll be back in New York
>>> in about a week.
>>> At that time I'll also be looking at the possibility of moving one of
>>> my AUR packages into [community], as I still don't have any on the
>>> repo (mostly because the majority of them are repackages, unsuitable
>>> for binary distribution, etc.).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ranguvar
>>> [Devin Cofer]
>>>
>> I would be very delighted to see bin32-wine moving into community. If
>> you can package all the lib32 packages it depends on you will a) be able
>> to do that b) have some packages that make good community candidates
>> anyway (lib32 stuff). Also, why can't you do it while on vacation?
>> Surely you have your SSH tunnel, right? :)
>>
>> -- Lord Sven-Hendrik "Svenstaro" Haase
>
> I second the bin32-wine thing =). For it to be useful though I think
> lib32-all-graphic-drivers need to be available?
>

no. only lib32-libgl and lib32-nvidia-utils, which already are in 
community.

lets stick in the future in $subject and start another thread if you 
feel you need to add something about packaging :D

-- 
Ionuț