On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 09:49:59AM +0200, Tomaz Canabrava wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 9:32 AM Robin Candau <[1][email protected]> wrote: > > On 7/31/25 9:14 AM, Tomaz Canabrava wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Jul 2025 at 23:37 Frederik Schwan <[2][email protected] > > <mailto:[3][email protected]>> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 06:27:04PM -0300, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote: > > > Excerpts from Tomaz Canabrava's message of julho 30, 2025 9:09 > am: > > > > > > > > I confirm that I'm sponsoring Martin and that I'll be his > > mentor. This > > > > message is signed with my gpg key. > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > Now that Tomaz has sent the signed email, the official discussion > > period started. But I'm glad some discussion is already happening > > and Martin already accepted some of suggestions. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Giancarlo Razzolini > > > > Hi Giancarlo, > > as per our TU bylaws [0] one must find two sponsoring _TUs_: > > > > > In order to become a TU, one must first find two sponsoring TUs > > following the guidelines outlined below, and arrange privately with > > them to announce their candidacy on the aur-general mailing list. > > > > But as of [1] you resigned as TU. Therefore it appears to me that > > you cannot sponsor Martin. > > > > Best regards, > > Frederik > > > > [0] [4]https://github.com/archlinux/tu-bylaws/blob/master/tu- > > bylaws.adoc <[5]https://github.com/archlinux/tu-bylaws/blob/master/ > tu- > > bylaws.adoc> > > [1] [6]https://lists.archlinux.org/archives/list/aur- > > [7][email protected]/message/ > > FETRJKGSYJANXVKMNED6QROO56LLUMKM/ <[8]https://lists.archlinux.org/ > > archives/list/[9][email protected]/message/ > > FETRJKGSYJANXVKMNED6QROO56LLUMKM/> > > > > > > hello, > > > > i disagree with the premisses states here, the document says that for > > addition of a TU one must find two TUs to sponsor, > > > > But we are not adding a TU, but a Package Maintainer. > > Gian is a package maintainer. > > so am I. > > > > best, > > tomaz > > > > > > > > Hi, > > The "TU / Trusted User" role is the old name for the current "PM / > Package Maintainer" one. See the related RFC for the rename of the role > [1]. > The bylaws has been updated accordingly [2][3]. > > Technically speaking, if Giancarlo resigned as a TU, he is defacto not a > package maintainer (as TU is simply the previous name of the current PM > role). > > > I do agree that the rename was a big thing but I feel that this is not correct > - the TU role and the Package Maintainer roles are slightly different.
So you say, that if I `mv filea fileb`, the checksum of the file contents differ? > if you look at the Package Maintainers list, Gian is still there, and Gian > still packages things that goes directly to extra and core, he wouldn't be > able > to do that if he was not a Package Maintainer. He is able to push packages due to his role as Developer. > other than that, Gian also sponsored people (me included) after he resigned as > TU, and that was not a problem. Just because nobody noticed back then doesn't mean the rules may not be enforced in the future.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
