From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-25263-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>) id 1IAsVK-0003Ux-Uu for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:14:39 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6HJDU6x016010; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:13:30 GMT Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org (c-24-6-168-204.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.6.168.204]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l6HJB4ws012818 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:11:05 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5A6D2480E2 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:59:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at twi-31o2.org Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gravity.twi-31o2.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e928IREuWW9x for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:58:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.100.31] (dsl211-165-131.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net [74.211.165.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2570D248079 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:58:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] council and proctors From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20070717074133.GB10105@superlupo.rechner> References: <20070716232113.65b2f5a1@terciopelo.krait.us> <58F6A7175B9E4801A68C191BFF8746EB@twi31o2.org> <20070717074133.GB10105@superlupo.rechner> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-4RRuF2SdRZmIsQ9Ix3+k" Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:09:58 -0700 Message-Id: <1184699398.8603.15.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 X-Archives-Salt: 96aee187-0e79-460f-ad7d-318e4d548dd2 X-Archives-Hash: b19f15ed30b384706e36f2e40074de11 --=-4RRuF2SdRZmIsQ9Ix3+k Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 09:41 +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote: > So the way i read it devrel would like to do something if requested, > but isn't supposed to enforce the CoC, nor has the authority? Considering that the Code of Conduct is a subset of the regular Gentoo developer policies that Developer Relations already enforces, I would say that they are definitely enforcing the CoC and have the authority. What DevRel currently doesn't have is authority to exercise over users, rather than just developers. Basically, we're back to where we were before we had the Proctors, except we have a more succinct document on what is expected behavior. There are several proposals out now (you've seen the enormous thread, I'm sure) dealing with possible alternative solutions to the Proctors. One of them will likely be implemented some time soon. We'll just have to wait and see. --=20 Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation --=-4RRuF2SdRZmIsQ9Ix3+k Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBGnRQGkT4lNIS36YERAixYAKCtneOPiWP7DDoZ5mPamleRDipeogCfQYuC 1wmX5zhOa3F1+rF6flZblkc= =sDmZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-4RRuF2SdRZmIsQ9Ix3+k-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list