On Dec 21, 2007 2:49 AM, Vesa Kaihlavirta <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Dec 21, 2007 10:44 AM, Callan Barrett <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > 2. No, I don't agree that we should give people who already half-ass
> > it (I suppose I'll use that instead of lazy) an extra 6 months to
> > continue half-assing it before we even consider removing them. They're
> > replaceable and if you don't like it you should go and start your own
> > distribution of half-asses.
> No, I like it here and I like the work I do. If you keep that attitude, I
> it is much better if it is you who leaves.
Holy crap this is petty. Keep in mind that Archlinux still hosts
everything related to the TUs, and you are tarnishing ArchLinux's
image by continuing with this.
The simply fact is: the TU ByLaws say that things must be done a
certain way. EVERYONE knew of these bylaws when joining the group.
There is no excuse here. The rules say "do this", people are not doing
it, as such, the rules are being broken.
Now, here's the irony of the situation. The ByLaws allow self
modification by the same voting process. You're more then welcome to
start a vote to change the wording of some of this to side with you.
Beyond that, however, breaking the rules is still breaking the rules.