----- Original Message -----
From: "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg(a)gmail.com>
To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, November 2, 2012 9:20:05 PM
Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process
On 11/02/2012 06:27 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
> Wrong. Do you know how few of the problems we see in Eclipse land
> don't need fixes upstreams? And some of these issues require
> man/months (years sometimes) upstream before there is smth to show
> in Fedora. Don't make your assumptions based on that. So if one
> logs in every few months to take a look at the number of bugs
> (nothing more) he is active but one that does fixes upstream for
> months before putting into Fedora is not. You see there is no
> black and white here!
Then that individual would simply log in or perform some other action
to
get him off that list...
> Plus, did you intentionally skipped the part about being active on
> A but not on B ? So if one does a good job of maintaining 9
> packages but doesn't do it for 1 because he/she is overloaded we
> should dump him? And please don't tell me that a good maintainer
> would not do that because many of us don't know the count(not the
> names) of the things they are responsible for so it's more than
> easier for a component to goes unnoticed.
No I simply assumed that he would have logged in to fiddle with one
or
more packages he owns and or is responsible for which would clearly
mark
him *active*.
I know my English sucks on a good day but i thought it was clear I
was
speaking of checking logins in our infrastructure not *packages* or
number of packages* maintainer might maintain since that's totally
irrelevant and just brings unnecessary complication to the equation
from
my pov...
Instead of people constant bringing up hypothetical solution while we
have plethora of unmaintained rotten packages in our repos why dont
you
try to come up with or propose an alternative solution to the problem
at
hand...
I already wrote it:
All of this was to show that whatever policy might be chosen it should be PER
PROJECT/PACKAGE not per maintainer.
The whole idea of non-responsive maintainer is nonsense. A person that does one thing in a
year is still more valuable than a hundred of freeloaders - because he/she actually did
one thing. We ship packages so every action should be per package and not per person!
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel