w32codec updated

[Caleb Maclennan]

> Search the mailing list archives for "mkochano" who also dropped his
> RW access, also sent a number of patches to the list afterwards and
> was asked many times to send the password hash, so he would regain his
> access.

Quite honestly, that has nothing to do with the present case. Even if a
situation were to be considered setting a precedent for this one, that user
was not banned from the lists per CDG vote.

> Very nice. Creating new rules when the old ones do not fit you.

I'm not just making stuff up here. Quite frankly our rules don't even cover
this case, nor do I think they should be expanded to cover every possible
scenario. A little bit of common sense should be applied, and discussion
on the list is one way to start. Only if that fails would we need to make
a rule out of this, which would require a CDG vote. I'd like to avoid that.

> He asked me personally to give him a vote of confidence.

That's not the same thing.

Just because you don't agree with the decision to ban him doesn't
give you the right to run rough shod over the whole thing and ignore
the problem as if it never happened.

> Maybe I also shouldn't be a developer because some people filter me in
> their mail clients? You are going too far. The ban is on the mailing
> list access, not on being developer. By the current rules, shadzik
> should be a developer, since he got the customary 3 votes for him.

I didn't say you shouldn't be a dev.

The current rules don't say anything about people who have been banned
for bad behavior. They don't even cover what to do when somebody gets
+3 votes but also collects several negatives. Hence the discussion here.

So how would you propose handling the fact that he's collected several -1
votes as well as +1's?

> Yes, we get that, you don't want shadzik to have RW access.

I didn't say that either. In fact I'd like to see him back IF a satisfactory
arrangement can be worked out where his track record for being inflammatory
towards other developers can be mitigated. Does your vote of confidence
extend to this?

Caleb