On 27/02/14 18:51, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
Tristan Santore píše v Čt 27. 02. 2014 v 16:40 +0000:
> On 27/02/14 16:28, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
>> Pierre-Yves Chibon píše v Čt 27. 02. 2014 v 15:57 +0100:
>>> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 03:33:00PM +0100, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
>>>> inode0 píše v Čt 27. 02. 2014 v 07:52 -0600:
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:26 AM, Jukka Palander
<jukka(a)devspain.com> wrote:
>>>> Originally, we wanted to use some automated mechanism such as checking
>>>> the last time stamp when the ambassador logged into FAS. Because if you
>>>> haven't logged into FAS for, say, 2 years you're not probably
around the
>>>> project any more. If you met such a condition all that would happen to
>>>> you would be an "inactive" flag that would remove you from the
public
>>>> list of ambassadors, but you would remain a member of the ambassadors
>>>> group, and you could change the flag back to "active" any
time.
>>>> Unfortunately our infra don't log such information.
>>> That's actually not true, we do keep info on what someone last logged
into FAS.
>>>
>>> Maybe I could gather some numbers a little like I did for packagers:
>>>
http://blog.pingoured.fr/index.php?post/2013/12/18/Fedora-packagers-activity
>>>
>>> I could use datagrepper and FAS and that should be pretty simple to do :)
>> That would be splendid!
>> I spoke with Patrick about it he told me the infra didn't keep such
>> info.
>>
>> IMHO the cleanest solution would be to notify people who haven't logged
>> in for more than 2 years (or any other period we agree on) and tell them
>> they're currently flagged as inactive, but they can easily change in
>> their FAS account administration. They wouldn't lose the membership,
>> they would just not be listed in the public list, and they would be just
>> a few clicks from being considered active again.
>> We would avoid any process hassle, fights, and heated blood.
>>
>> Jiri
>>
>>
>> --
>> ambassadors mailing list
>> ambassadors(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ambassadors
> I did read your ticket, I had to login for that one!
> Question is did you read my reply properly. SHOULD had a real meaning there.
> Also, this discussion has come up for years and years. Some FAS accounts
> are already set as inactive under certain conditions. I made sure to
> check with Infra before I wrote a reply.
>
> Also, my last email was strongly worded, because some imbecile
> complained about another ambassadors activity or lack thereof and
> questioning why he was using another distribution.
>
> Quite frankly, either which is none of the persons businesses and not a
> good way to encourage ambassador activities.
>
> So, I would like to know, where you think I have twisted "claims", I
> actually quoted a bit of your ticket too.
You're twisting our words because you're saying or reacting to something
that is not in the proposal.
Once for all: we do NOT want to judge anyone's activity and we do NOT
want to encourage anyone to do so. The issue are not ambassadors who are
not visibly active or are not doing "enough". That's perfectly fine.
We're trying to find a solution how to clean the ambassadors group from
people who are not clearly interested in any connection with the Fedora
Project any more, who wouldn't even care if we removed them from the
group.
Based on the discussion, I think it's pretty obvious that doing it
manually by submitting requests might lead to a bad atmosphere in the
project. Mainly because it could lead to false positives and hence
offending people. So we should keep looking for a solution which is
non-invasive and based on the FAS data. That's I guess the most
important outcome from the discussion so far.
Jiri
--
ambassadors mailing list
ambassadors(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ambassadors To quote your email:
Hi,
yesterday we had a long discussion about whether we want to have a
mechanism to remove completely inactive ambassadors or not. This issue
is brought up again and again, so I think it's time to discuss it
properly and eventually make a decision.
You can find more in this ticket:
https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/358
I just read the ticket with mentions two issues! And made comments to
such effect. But again, even if somebody has been inactive for a number
of years. Why are they inactive in the first place ?
So, how about finding out about reasons as to why people are inactive,
instead of just cleaning them out.
There is a real issue in attracting more contributors, which will not be
addressed by just removing the people from certain groups in fas. We
never delete FAS accounts, so that means, it makes no real sense to even
remove them from groups they are in, unless this is a security related
issue. But in terms of Infra, people get emailed if their SSH key needs
updating and if they do not reply, they are inactivated. But that is a
totally different issue.
And to quote Inode0:
We don't need a broad discussion about Code of Conduct violations and
we really don't need a broad discussion about periodically cleaning up
accounts as has been done in the past.
So, I am clearly not the only person who has interpreted the ticket in
that manner! Jiri, did you post the wrong ticket by accident ?
Regards,
Tristan
--
Tristan Santore BSc MBCS
TS4523-RIPE
Network and Infrastructure Operations
InterNexusConnect
Mobile +44-78-55069812
Tristan.Santore(a)internexusconnect.net
Former Thawte Notary
(Please note: Thawte has closed its WoT programme down,
and I am therefore no longer able to accredit trust)
For Fedora related issues, please email me at:
TSantore(a)fedoraproject.org