From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23EC21381F3 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9A73021C031; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:47:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oa0-f49.google.com (mail-oa0-f49.google.com [209.85.219.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9D0721C012 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:46:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id l10so4424446oag.22 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 02:46:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=+4WV3egmM9iZrCn+wAARAi2NrSKdFxSTgPP99uQPJlw=; b=uVba85MJpefYf+KfzTHT5J2lr2XpK/WSwsZbatBIIzPBp2kEBfLIjYpCEU8lfE99cg Bm02jw1yV7UEhDTFtmgUuTMmyZcsbTSNwy+HJDUoohK+kV2NNC5h4D2TEzlFdQ4dc7Kl Kv46x01vbvzKHdl79YZP1F2gKu5fj7o6ClVS6zAlLKYn0C8GmFDHD4YGf1byAcR6A9BI liPsyeSb9Zy5LpO2XhjAp+jw7XHeBYdgfQpGntlht21mmOTzCIvn7raOqMAPw0F+Ss5s l76w1I9spZfb9I/XMQCxWj0xQipmPbEc+MKxrmkABkHwSROMHNFHUuVsCpQmLz1oxWFD 8dtw== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.124.98 with SMTP id mh2mr10563939obb.88.1356086809099; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 02:46:49 -0800 (PST) Sender: markos.chandras@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.28.169 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 02:46:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1356079791.2648.153.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca> References: <50D3F3E3.6090106@gentoo.org> <1356079791.2648.153.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:46:49 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: XHUJqBWndnIqBOnvDWkP2CAjTZg Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Time based retirements From: Markos Chandras To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 87df4451-32c8-4218-b4c5-9c61d2fa68f0 X-Archives-Hash: 71f3256d6cd0cade29adf36a4ff59f8c On 21 December 2012 08:49, Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 21:30 -0800, "Pawe=C5=82 Hajdan, Jr." wrote: >> On 12/20/12 7:21 PM, Doug Goldstein wrote: >> > I'm curious who had the brain dead idea to retire Gentoo developers >> > that are still interested in the distro, that maintain low activity >> > packages for herds that are stretched way too thin, and are still >> > contributing to the distro in many ways other than direct CVS commits >> > (e.g. overlays, user support, providing hardware to other devs, etc). >> >> Dough, thank you for rising the issue. >> >> I'm receiving the undertakers@ e-mail, so I have a pretty good view of >> what's happening. >> >> I have several suggestions how we can improve things: >> >> 1. 3 months is too short period anyway. >> >> 2. Think through what the goals are. We do not want to retire as many >> people as possible. We do not want to frustrate people who do contribute >> to Gentoo. We do not want to discourage people who consider becoming new >> developers. At least I don't. >> >> 3. I think what's important is to keep packages maintained. I consider >> maintainership to be a duty, not a privilege. If someone is listed in >> metadata.xml, but is not really maintaining the package, that creates a >> formal illusion that the package is maintained, and may prevent other >> people from stepping up and taking maintenance of that package. >> >> 4. I suggest that we focus on the above: keeping packages maintained. >> Taking packages out of hands of inactive/overworked maintainers is good. >> They can always become _more_ active, which is easier if they retain cvs >> access. If they make a single commit every 3-6 months, I'm fine with >> that as long as things are maintained properly. >> >> 5. Remember that cvs/bugzilla activity is not the only way of >> contributing. It's probably most tanglible and very needed, but let's >> not reduce real people and their real world situations, and their effort >> to contribute to just dates and numbers. >> >> Pawe=C5=82 >> >> > > +1 > > Even though I am a relatively new developer, I too got an email > stating my inactivity (not from undertakers@). My main purpose for > becoming a dev was not for ebuild work, but more for coding. Three > months is way too short to be making that type of list. > > For all those young devs out there still in college/university. You > will find that time accelerates as you age. 3 months may seem a long > time for you now, but give it another 5-10 years and you'll discover > that 3 months can go by quite quickly. Especially with a family (wife, > kids, pets) and a full time job. > > -- > Brian Dolbec Nobody said the policy is correct. I face the same problems so the policy might not be appropriate anymore. However, I totally disagree with the way Doug started this thread. Calling us "brain dead" ? No sorry, I am not willing to discuss anything about this policy nor willing to change it if someone can't behave properly and ask us nicely to discuss the problem. We never *insulted* or *threated* anyone with retirement, we are extremely polite and we just ask for status updates in order to clean up metadata, reassign bugs and look for new maintainers of unattended packages. Nobody ever complained in the past, and all of them were willing to drop themselves from metadata without problems. But I never expected this attitude just for asking "hey are you there? do you still want to maintain all these packages? any ETA on coming back". Seriously... --=20 Regards, Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2