[aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period
xyne at archlinux.ca
Sun Mar 24 00:42:18 EDT 2013
Lukas Jirkovsky wrote:
>On 23 March 2013 17:51, Xyne <xyne at archlinux.ca> wrote:
>> Voting "no" rather than abstaining indicates that you have reasons to reject
>> the candidate. These should have been brought up during the discussion period.
>> If they are valid then other TUs should be made aware of them and take them into
>> account. If they are not then they should be addressed. In either case they
>> should be discussed.
>What about adding some field where TU can (anonymously) express why
>they chose "No"? IMO it doesn't make much sense to have such field for
>"Yes" and "Abstain" though, as that would be just annoying with no
>Such field could introduce valuable insight to what other TU's think
>is wrong with the application. I think it can also help the newly
>accepted TU's, as they can learn what can be improved (unless it's
>something stupid like "I don't like your silly T-shirt"). Hopefully
>more TU's who voted "No" would express their opinions there, as that
>would be anonymous while the discussions on the mailing list are not.
If a TU has an objection that he cannot support publicly then something is very
wrong. The application process should not be some mysterious black box of
negative, baseless opinions. If a TU would rather keep an objection to himself
than risk offending the candidate by expressing it then either the objection
itself is without merit or the TU is more concerned about his own popularity
than the quality of the distribution.
More information about the aur-general