benjamin at python.org
Wed Sep 22 17:06:06 CEST 2010
2010/9/22 Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at 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
We'll note that for the future.
More information about the Python-Dev