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

[Xyne]

On 2018-01-19 09:16 +0100
Lukas Jirkovsky via aur-general wrote:

>My common sense tells me that activity that helps Arch Linux to
>prosper should be considered – be it packaging, triaging AUR requests
>etc.
>
>From that point of view, it makes sense to not count voting as TU
>activity, thereby blocking the potential removal.
>
>Just my 2 cents.
>
>Lukas



I oppose this patch and will vote against for the reasons given in my previous
reply on this list, which I repost here:


> The intent of the first sectionm before the "OR", is to measure any sort of
> activity. Updating a package, voting or posting a comment shows that the TU
> is still logging in to the AUR and thus active in some sense. The point of
> the first section was to provide a way to remove TUs who had simply
> disappeared. This is as it should be. There is no mandated TU quota for
> package actions.

> The intent of the second section, after the "OR", is to ensure that TUs who
> repeatedly disregard votes and possibly prevent quorum from being established
> can be removed.

The special removal procedure was only added to handle special cases where the
TU has clearly abandoned Arch altogether (no detectable activity in the last
two months) or the TU has simply ignored votes and thus jeopardized quorum,
again over a period of two months or more.

The normal procedure should be used to remove a TU who has not impeded other
TUs in their mission and who has been active within the last two months, which
gives them time to offer an explanation or a resignation.

Regards,
Xyne