From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Iq9Wc-0005bg-Ba for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2007 15:42:34 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with SMTP id lA8FgVqN002286; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 15:42:31 GMT Received: from mailrelay.tugraz.at (mailrelay.tu-graz.ac.at [129.27.2.202]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id lA8FgUsP002281 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 15:42:30 GMT Received: from superlupo.localdomain (fanachpc62.tu-graz.ac.at [129.27.185.72]) (authenticated bits=0) by mailrelay2.tugraz.at (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id lA8FgR2l026211 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 16:42:27 +0100 (CET) Received: by superlupo.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 79C1757A97; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 16:42:50 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 16:42:50 +0100 From: Wernfried Haas To: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] CoC enforcement proposal Message-ID: <20071108154250.GC23408@superlupo.rechner> References: <20071108120507.GJ5516@supernova> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-council@gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oTHb8nViIGeoXxdp" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071108120507.GJ5516@supernova> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-Spam-Scanner: SpamAssassin 3.002003 X-Spam-Score-relay: -1.9 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.63 on 129.27.10.19 X-Archives-Salt: acf064ea-427b-4c36-a03b-320478dea0e5 X-Archives-Hash: 55b24b7fcb1645bfca2165fc1b5284ae --oTHb8nViIGeoXxdp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 04:05:07AM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > By making initial actions temporary (e.g., 6-12 hours in most cases),=20 > they can be taken rapidly with little negative consequence in the case=20 > of a mistake. The goal is to provide developers with a cooling-off=20 > period but allow them to rejoin the discussion with little loss.=20 ++ > All this team's actions must be approved by the lead within a short time= =20 > period or must be reverted. It's expected that many actions will range=20 > from 6-12 hours, so 12 hours seems like a reasonable time to require=20 > lead approval. Whenever the lead is unavailable, approval falls to the=20 > council. (Remember, two council members together can make decisions.) I like the spirit, but I'm not sure how feasible this is in practice. In any case, they should be documented (e.g. sent to some private list where the lead and council can see it). cheers, Wernfried --=20 Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne (at) gentoo.org Gentoo Forums - http://forums.gentoo.org forum-mods (at) gentoo.org #gentoo-forums (freenode) --oTHb8nViIGeoXxdp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHMy56K/GNBBblp4ARAmukAJ4teWiCwgpRQxHkoxbuqC5nMlOXbQCfXCjf OKBZiBpxV3FUKUk4Og6lR2M= =PUcg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --oTHb8nViIGeoXxdp-- -- gentoo-council@gentoo.org mailing list