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 A7C351381F3 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:34:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4029C21C128; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:34:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0068C21C0FF for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:34:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-f54.google.com (mail-qa0-f54.google.com [209.85.216.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: djc) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1700F33D77F for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:34:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id j15so3263320qaq.13 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:34:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.178.140 with SMTP id bm12mr1459985qcb.115.1356078849002; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:34:09 -0800 (PST) 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 10.49.1.17 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:33:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <50D3F3E3.6090106@gentoo.org> References: <50D3F3E3.6090106@gentoo.org> From: Dirkjan Ochtman Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:33:48 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Time based retirements To: Gentoo Development Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 34076e46-c164-43ef-80a6-e20897a73f93 X-Archives-Hash: f1c5610007a07eb0e33c2f3c0e08e8fc On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 6:30 AM, "Pawe=C5=82 Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > 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. +1000. The point is not to retire developers. To point is to make sure we have a clear picture of what packages are (somewhat actively) being maintained. Perhaps the undertakers project (or some other project) should focus more on package maintenance history than activity history. Cheers, Dirkjan