[aur-general] TU membership application

Xyne xyne at archlinux.ca
Sun Sep 1 13:39:37 UTC 2019

On 2019-08-19 16:49 +0300
Sergej Pupykin wrote:

>Giancarlo Razzolini via aur-general wrote:
>> Having nothing against is not the same as actively sponsoring it. All
>> this discussion is kind of pointless until we hear from both sponsors
>> telling us they actively sponsor Jean's application. Then the discussion
>> period can begin.   
>Ok, I am not sure about "actively" :) but I want to see parsedmarc
>package bundle in community. As well as ghidra and coturn (which is
>already in community), so I sponsor him.

Sponsorship is supposed to be an active advocacy of the applicant based on the
sponsor's evaluation of the applicant's skills and trustworthiness. It should
be based on a strong positive opinion of the applicant and the sponsor
essentially vouches for the applicant by sponsoring them.

The lackadaisical approach to sponsorship is one of the main reasons that we've
moved to a system with two sponsors. Maybe I missed the joke, but having
nothing against someone and wanting to see a particular package in community is
not a good enough reason to sponsor someone. A TU application may not be a
matter of life and death but the process should be taken somewhat seriously
nevertheless given how many people could be potentially impacted if a malicious
candidate is accepted. If TUs start sponsoring anyone who asks based on these
latter criteria, the system is broken. Especially when we have candidates who
just ask different TUs until they get two to agree. We need to agree to set the
bar a little higher.

I am only reacting to the apparent indifference of sponsorship here, which is
independent of Jean Lucas' application. The latter will be discussed if and
when Alexander confirms his sponsorship.


More information about the aur-general mailing list