From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JCgm3-0006MW-Aw for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 19:39:39 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 75FB4E06E9; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 19:39:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp-out1.libero.it (smtp-out1.libero.it [212.52.84.41]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43EAEE06E9 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 19:39:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from outrelay08.libero.it (192.168.32.103) by smtp-out1.libero.it (7.3.120) id 47137F8507EC547E for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 20:39:36 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAN6xhEeXOQo6/2dsb2JhbAAIqgU Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.0.6]) ([151.57.10.58]) by OutRelay-b08.libero.it with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2008 20:39:34 +0100 Message-ID: <478522DE.4070204@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 20:39:10 +0100 From: Luca Barbato User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071127) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Item for 10 Jan 2008 Council meeting References: <1199887212.23272.59.camel@liasis.inforead.com> In-Reply-To: <1199887212.23272.59.camel@liasis.inforead.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: dcf0638e-e43a-4cb5-847d-6606fed67ce0 X-Archives-Hash: cd4d8bf75d39545cb1db0bea74450a21 Ferris McCormick wrote: > With all due respect, for some reason we don't have Proctors anymore to enforce > the CoC. The perception is that they aren't/weren't _exactly_ needed as they are, either because nobody wants the secret policy feeling or because self regulation is working almost nicely. > Thus, things we would expect the proctors to catch and handle under CoC > get sent to devrel instead. All I am doing is wondering out loud (now that CoC > is coming alive again) if we should start processing these under CoC rules. I'm > asking Council because CoC belongs to Council, but I do not expect a ruling, > just perhaps an interesting discussion. See, these things can't be caught before > they get to devrel because you ensured there would be no one to catch them --- > you are the one who wanted to kill off the proctors, after all. Item already present I think. > I am asking a question as a member of the devrel confres subproject and as > an interested developer. you know the channel and the time ^^; lu -- Luca Barbato Gentoo Council Member Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list