2010/9/22 Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org>: > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> A number of lingering issues that would have otherwise continued >> lingering did indeed get closed. That work is still appreciated, even >> if it was ultimately deemed by the other tracker admins not to be >> sufficient to balance out the hassles created by his aggressive stance >> towards closing older issues (which, while unloved, are not >> automatically invalid). > > How and how often was Mark reminded about this?
I believe that mailing list thread was the main thrust. However, many issues which he closed were reopened with a message saying why they shouldn't be closed. > >> If this had happened *without* the prior discussion regarding more >> appropriate handling of tracker issues, then I would have an issue >> with it. However, given that the first reaction was to provide >> additional mentoring, with revocation of privileges only happening >> when the problems continued, that seems to me like the way this >> process is *meant* to work. > > Where was the decision to revoke privileges discussed? Not on any > mailing list that I am subscribed to. Was Mark given an ultimatum? Indeed, it was on IRC. > > Given that this came out rather unfortunately (even if the end result > is the best that could have happened) I would recommend that in the > future more attention is paid to "documenting" publicly that someone's > being booted out was inevitable, by an exchange of messages on > python-dev (or python-committers if we want to limit distribution). > And no, I don't think that IRC (where I suspect this happened) is > sufficient. We'll note that for the future. -- Regards, Benjamin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com