[aur-general] [tu-bylaws] [PATCH] Clarify the process for Special Removal of an inactive TU

Lukas Jirkovsky l.jirkovsky at gmail.com
Fri Jan 19 08:16:46 UTC 2018

On 19 January 2018 at 00:18, Eli Schwartz via aur-general
<aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
> Not everything that is available only to an aurweb account of the
> Trusted User type, qualifies as a TU "privilege"
> Signed-off-by: Eli Schwartz <eschwartz at archlinux.org>
> ---
> Handy link to context and surrounding discussion:
> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-January/033789.html
> The current wording of the bylaws indicates that there are two ways for
> a TU to qualify for special removal due to inactivity:
> 1) Do not participate in voting, thereby potentially blockading a quorum.
> 2) Do not participate in general TU'ish activities like maintaining
>    [community], administrating the AUR and the packagers and users therein,
>    being representative of TUs in general on this mailing list by being
>    awesome and stuff, i.e. posting (hopefully useful information that helps
>    AUR users), and... um... voting?
> Point #2 calls out "performed any action that required TU privileges on
> the AUR", but does the tu voting interface on aurweb count as that or
> not? Moreover, do we *want* it to count? It seems to be somewhat
> defeating the purpose of the process, i.e. as long as a TU doesn't
> actually block quorum during a vote, they can remain while not actually
> performing any of the inherent functions of a TU.
> Now, I would argue that under a common sense interpretation the original
> intent of the bylaws was almost certainly that voting does not count as
> a "TU privilege", since a TU is someone who has the "privilege" to
> administrate AUR packages and users in order to keep good order, and
> select good packages to upload to [community].
> But bylaws exist in order to prevent people from having different
> interpretations of common sense. So this should be clarified no matter
> what.
>  tu-bylaws.txt | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> diff --git a/tu-bylaws.txt b/tu-bylaws.txt
> index c7a376e..27e4804 100644
> --- a/tu-bylaws.txt
> +++ b/tu-bylaws.txt
> @@ -142,7 +142,9 @@ A TU who has not done ANY of the following for a period of at least 2 months:
>  1. added, removed or updated a package in +[community]+ or the AUR
> -2. performed any action that required TU privileges on the AUR
> +2. performed any action that required TU privileges on the AUR, for example
> +resolving package requests, modifying user accounts, or force pushing to a
> +package base, but NOT including participation in a voting period
>  3. posted a message to https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general]
> --
> 2.16.0

My common sense tells me that activity that helps Arch Linux to
prosper should be considered – be it packaging, triaging AUR requests

>From that point of view, it makes sense to not count voting as TU
activity, thereby blocking the potential removal.

Just my 2 cents.


More information about the aur-general mailing list