Hey Matthew (and rest of council), On Thu, May 22, 2025, at 5:15 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > The Fedora Council overturns FESCo's decision [3284] to remove Proven > Packager rights from a contributor. The linked issue is private, are there plans to make it public in some form or shape so we can see how the process went at the time? > The contributor didn't receive a formal notification or warning > from FESCo. In the initial announcements about this FESco said that the proven packager in question was warned multiple times and had numerous private complaints against them. Specifically: >> Despite several warnings and conversations with FESCo representatives, X >> has continued to use his provenpackager privileges in an unapproved manner How should we reconcile this? Were there warnings but they weren't "official", or were there no warnings and the FESco announcement was incorrect? > The lack of a defined process for situations like this needs to be addressed > before such a decision can be made, including provisions for appropriate > warnings and chances to respond by the contributor. In addition, the > announcement of a decision should not publicly identify the person. Great, public naming and shaming was my main concern. Thanks for the update. -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
