On 2019.09.21 08:01, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hi, everyone.
> 
> Since we currently don't explicitly indicate the appeal procedure
> for Undertaker actions, I'd like to propose adding the following to
> our
> wiki page.
> 
> TL;DR: Potential retirements can be appealed <1 mo before execution
> (or
> post execution), with ComRel being the first appeal instance,
> and Council being the second.
> 
> 
> Full proposed policy, with rationale:
> 
> 1. Both pending and past retirements can be appealed to ComRel.
> The ComRel decision can be further appealed to the Council.
> 
> R: ComRel is a parent project for Undertakers, so it seems reasonable
> to
> make it the first appeal instance.
> 
> 
> 2. Pending retirements can be appealed no earlier than one month
> before
> planned execution date (i.e. no earlier than after receiving third-
> mail).
> 
> R: This is meant to prevent premature appeals while Undertakers would
> not retire the developer anyway (e.g. due to new activity). 
> Undertakers
> recheck activity while sending third mail, so that's a good point to
> confirm that someone's retirement is still pending.
> 
> 
> 3. Throughout the appeal process, the pending retirement is suspended.
> 
> If the appeal occurs post retirement, the developer remains retired
> throughout the appeal process.  The appeal process is finished if
> either:
> 
>   a. the Council issues final decision,
> 
>   b. the ComRel decision is not appealed further within 7 days,
> 
>   c. both sides agree not to appeal further.
> 
> R: We obviously want to avoid ping-pong of retiring, then unretiring
> (then maybe retiring again).
> 
> 
> 4. The appeal process is meant to resolve disagreements between
> Undertakers and developers.  It is not a replacement for communicating
> with Undertakers.
> 
> R: We don't want people to appeal everything without even trying to
> resolve it between us.  For example, if we missed something, then you
> should tell us rather than calling for appeal.  However, if we do
> disagree on whether something counts as sufficient activity, this is
> something you can appeal.
> 
> 
> 5. The appeal process resolves each case individually based on
> existing
> policies.  While it may influence future policies, those need to be
> carried out via appropriate policy making channels.
> 
> R: In other words, appeals don't change policies silently.  If a
> policy
> needs to be changed, it must follow proper channel with ml review.
> 
> 
> WDYT?
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Michał Górny
> 
> 

Michał,

Looks good. It also looks like the standard process so does it
need to be documented explicitly on the Undertakers page? 

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
arm64