From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OUgeV-0008CU-Px for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 13:51:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ADE6AE0944; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 13:51:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E491E0944 for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 13:51:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.3] (e177089114.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.177.89.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 952DE1B407F for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 13:51:26 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4C2DEEDB.8020100@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 15:51:23 +0200 From: Sebastian Pipping User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100419 Thunderbird/3.0.4 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo References: <4C184B06.8040806@gentoo.org> <4C18FFE4.4080908@gentoo.org> <4C1909D4.7010703@gentoo.org> <4C1975F7.5010903@gentoo.org> <4C2A8BFF.5040400@gentoo.org> <4C2AB477.3050309@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4C2AB477.3050309@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0ca529e8-7b98-49d6-816c-f5bb1ad96cc7 X-Archives-Hash: 8ae29e01bb8ea3e0798707bb4c0eaec3 Jorge, On 06/30/10 05:05, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: > The following is a list with a few reasons to retire inactive developers: > > * security considerations regarding access to Gentoo infra, including > tampering of the tree > * need to ensure that maintainers are accessible, take care of > packages and bugs and that they reply on due time to community > contacts and requests > * desire to have project and team membership, as well as package > maintenance reflect reality > * make it clear what areas of the project are understaffed and what > packages require new maintainers > * need to ensure that developers keep up to date regarding policies > and use of the tree by using it interesting, thanks for elaborating. I wonder if we could start making a stronger distinction between these two cases of retirement. If it isn't a throw-out I would prefer to have that made so very clear that no one ever feels thrown out that way. Especially that there's no guarantee to be allowed to return feels a bit odd to me. Best, Sebastian