Front page | perl.modules |
Postings from October 2016
On 10/02/2016 01:33 PM, David Golden wrote: > On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 4:31 AM, Peter Rabbitson <ribasushi@cpan.org > <mailto:ribasushi@cpan.org>> wrote: > > The administrative transfer *combined* with the amount of work put > > in by myself, and the utter disinterest of all other maintainers, places > > me practically, procedurally and morally in the position to unilaterally > > decide what to do with said project. > > We repeat: by PAUSE admin fiat, this is no longer true. Saying it > repeatedly will not make it true. > > I considered preemptively escrowing DBIC primary permissions with > ADOPTME pending the outcome of these discussions, but felt that might > discourage you from participating further and might show unfair bias > against your ideas and moral authority, which is not our goal. > > However – make no mistake – unilateral transfers will be undone > unless we feel satisfied that the principles we have established for > an orderly resolution have been honored. Your (the admins) position has been noted. > > < snip > > > > I am still planning to remove all co-maint perms and handover the first-come > > to a yet-undisclosed person. Given no clear line of succession [...] > > the only responsible thing to do is to select a single spot of > > responsibility and provide all possible support and infrastructure > > for a proper project-freeze. > > That's not "I'm leaving CPAN and will be letting others take things > forward". That's "I'm kicking out everyone already involved and > freezing the project." The above is a verifiably dishonest statement. Nobody else is involved at this stage and has not been for years. > < snip> > > We don't oppose your plan. We oppose the lack of transparency around > an important decision for an important CPAN project. I explained my reasoning for the lack of transparency, and am repeating it here again: > The selected person will not be announced until after the fact, in > order to insulate him from having to deal with mst, before any > permission transfer has taken place (or before my own work has even > completed). In order to ease tensions I *will* share that he is a well > known community member and was an invitee to at least one Perl5 QA > Hackathon. If the above is not satisfactory to the PAUSE admins - then I am afraid your only option is to administratively prevent me from doing that, as outlined at the start of this email. > We, too, encourage other maintainers and/or community members to join > the conversation. As suggested in an earlier email: the PAUSE admins (as the only legitimate concerned party at this point) would likely benefit having this question asked in a wider forum ( the DBIC mailing list and/or other channels ). Essentially someone has to trigger a "vote of no confidence", otherwise this entire exchange is just a time consuming farce. At this point the layout of various positions seems clear. My own plans remain as described earlier: I plan to continue work for a bit longer, and go through with my original plan of action, baring an uproar from the user community. Regards RIBASUSHIThread Previous | Thread Next