Scripsit Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 06:49:18PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
That would mean that if somebody _has_ done something that merits
expulsion (knowingly uploading packages with trojaned backdoors in
them is the clearest example that comes to mind) can
On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 06:49:18PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So far as I can tell, the decision to make the first message public or
semi-public has been a decision taken by the people who chose to start it,
not by the process, and changing the
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maybe we can convince more people to ignore such public statements unless
the expulsion process *actually* starts (which so far as I can tell has
yet to ever happen).
I think there have been at least two expulsion processes started,
but both have ended at step 2
Em Seg, 2006-04-10 às 21:30 +0200, Sven Luther escreveu:
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 03:51:19PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
I know that having codified expulsion procedures is tempting to use
them, and I do think that they are a good thing to have. But please
consider one thing when you think
Scripsit Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So far as I can tell, the decision to make the first message public or
semi-public has been a decision taken by the people who chose to start it,
not by the process, and changing the process isn't going to address that
problem (unless, I suppose, there's
Le Lun 10 Avril 2006 21:30, Sven Luther a écrit :
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 03:51:19PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
Dear developers,
I know that having codified expulsion procedures is tempting to use
them, and I do think that they are a good thing to have. But please
consider one thing
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 16 Mar 2006, MJ Ray spake thusly:
I disagree. The candidate only seems to get that choice
after there are enough people gathered against them. When a
totally crap request collapses without getting Q supporters,
the request and supporters details stay
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think the idea is that the person facing expulsion procedures
may not want future employers to be able to google about the
episode. Given that the process does fail, it would simplify matters
for the individual if they did not have to try to
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 13:32 +0100, Harald Geyer wrote:
I don't want future employers to be able to google about my bugs.
http://bugs.debian.org/robots.txt
Thijs :)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
also sprach Thijs Kinkhorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.19.1416 +0100]:
I don't want future employers to be able to google about my bugs.
http://bugs.debian.org/robots.txt
Mh. Our bug database is also a source of information... why not
index it?
--
Please do not send copies of list mail
On Sunday 19 March 2006 14:39, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Thijs Kinkhorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.19.1416
+0100]:
I don't want future employers to be able to google about my bugs.
http://bugs.debian.org/robots.txt
Mh. Our bug database is also a source of information... why
also sprach Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.19.1457 +0100]:
It can be searched using google groups. See http://www.debian.org/Bugs/.
So a future employee can google bugs. It's probably only a question
of time until Google integrates groups with the main web search.
--
Please do not send
On 16 Mar 2006, MJ Ray spake thusly:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 16 Mar 2006, Christoph Berg stated:
I for myself would very much prefer the rumors, and maybe even
publically spreading (leaking?) the word on irc than to deliver
the expulsion request directly to every lurking
Dear developers,
I know that having codified expulsion procedures is tempting to use
them, and I do think that they are a good thing to have. But please
consider one thing when you think about invoking them: [1]
Please use debian-private. [3]
The reason is simply that expulsion is not a
to, 2006-03-16 kello 15:51 +0100, Christoph Berg kirjoitti:
I know that having codified expulsion procedures is tempting to use
them, and I do think that they are a good thing to have. But please
consider one thing when you think about invoking them: [1]
Please use debian-private. [3]
I
Re: Lars Wirzenius 2006-03-16 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I disagree. Posting things to -private does not really keep them secret
or confidential, but it does generate a lot of rumors. Rumors are
usually worse than the real thing. Therefore, in my honest opinion, it's
better to keep things in the open,
On 16 Mar 2006, Christoph Berg stated:
Re: Lars Wirzenius 2006-03-16
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I disagree. Posting things to -private does not really keep them
secret or confidential, but it does generate a lot of
rumors. Rumors are usually worse than the real thing. Therefore, in
my honest
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 16 Mar 2006, Christoph Berg stated:
I for myself would very much prefer the rumors, and maybe even
publically spreading (leaking?) the word on irc than to deliver the
expulsion request directly to every lurking slashdot/heise/whatever
writer on earth.
18 matches
Mail list logo
