On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Ashwin <ashwin.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 05/10/2010 05:17 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > On 05/10/2010 05:11 PM, Ashwin wrote: > >> > >> I am glad you did. It highlights my point - Is there any accountability > >> defined here ? Even a slightest of indication of *accountability* ? > >> > > > > I am not sure what your point is. Is it that, voluntary roles should > > have no accountability at all? > > > > Yes. These roles are for a cause which the person believes in, A person > committed to a cause has no need to explain. > I am sorry but I completely disagree a view point that volunteer roles should have zero accountability. I am a maintainer for several packages in Fedora and I volunteered to do it. I am at-least in part accountable for making sure bugs are responded to and fixed in time. I cannot disclaim this accountability just because I happened to have volunteered to do it. I am sure you will not happy to have bug reports from you ignored either. Considering that most of the packages in Fedora are maintained voluntarily, your view point of no accountability will result in a unusable distribution. Think about that. > Assume, Linus take a leave for an undefined time period, you want an > explanation from Linus as it disturbs the Fedora release cycle. This is > not correct. > Linus is a employee of the Linux foundation and is not a volunteer anymore. He is definitely accountable for Linux kernel relases and does take enough care to inform people before he goes on a vacation. So this example seems poorly choosen. Rahul
_______________________________________________ india mailing list india@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/india
