Non-responsive package maintainer process - backintime

[Johannes Lips]

Dear all,

I would like to formally send a mail requesting some feedback from cicku regarding the
maintenance of the backintime package. 
There is one open bug, which requests an update [1] and additionally a trac ticket [2] was
also opened, not by me.
I can see, that with an upgrade to later versions we'll loose the differentiation
between a KDE and Gnome GUI, but I don't see why that really is an issue.
Additionally two request to become co-maintainer are unanswered so far, so I hope that
we'll get that sorted pretty quick. 
Possibly there are some Chinese New Year festivities, so perhaps we'll give him some
more time, but I would love to get some feedback.

Johannes

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186184
[2] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1542

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:04 AM, Johannes Lips <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Dear all,
>
>  I would like to formally send a mail requesting some feedback from cicku regarding the
> maintenance of the backintime package. 
Did you actually email cicku directly?  I don't see him on CC.

josh

[Richard Shaw]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
wrote:

>  On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:04 AM, Johannes Lips
> <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  > Dear all,
>  >
>  > I would like to formally send a mail requesting some feedback from cicku
>  regarding the maintenance of the backintime package.
>
>  Did you actually email cicku directly?  I don't see him on CC. 

He may be on another Fedora hiatus again. I have a stalled review from last
October and have attempted to ping him both in the BZ and direct email with
no response.

Thanks,
Richard

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Josh Boyer
> <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:04 AM, Johannes Lips <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt;
> > wrote:
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I would like to formally send a mail requesting some feedback from cicku
> > > regarding the maintenance of the backintime package.
> >
> > Did you actually email cicku directly?  I don't see him on CC.
>
>
>  He may be on another Fedora hiatus again. I have a stalled review from last
>  October and have attempted to ping him both in the BZ and direct email with
>  no response. 
That is helpful to know.  Thank you for chiming in.

josh

[Johannes Lips]

>  On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:04 AM, Johannes Lips
> <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  
>  Did you actually email cicku directly?  I don't see him on CC.
>   
Well, apparently I didn't add him to this e-mail, but he should have received
enough notifications from bugzilla already. Additionally from someone who maintains more
than 200 packages in fedora, I kind of expect that he is reachable within a reasonable
time-frame. Otherwise it might be too much hassle, if something needs to be fixed.

Johannes
> josh

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Johannes Lips <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:04 AM, Johannes Lips
> <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >
> > Did you actually email cicku directly?  I don't see him on CC.
> >
>  Well, apparently I didn't add him to this e-mail, but he should have received enough
> notifications from bugzilla already. Additionally from someone who maintains more than 200
> packages in fedora, I kind of expect that he is reachable within a reasonable time-frame.
> Otherwise it might be too much hassle, if something needs to be fixed. 
You make a lot of assumptions in that statement.  People filter email
quite a bit and relying on bugzilla mail alone is not sufficient.

I find it ironic that your original email said "I would like to
formally send a mail requesting some feedback from cicku.." but you
didn't bother to email him directly.  That doesn't strike me as very
formal.  I'm under no illusions that he is likely to respond to direct
contact either, but it should at least be attempted.

josh

[Johannes Lips]

>  On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Johannes Lips
> <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  
>  You make a lot of assumptions in that statement.  People filter email
>  quite a bit and relying on bugzilla mail alone is not sufficient.
>  
>  I find it ironic that your original email said "I would like to
>  formally send a mail requesting some feedback from cicku.." but you
>  didn't bother to email him directly.  That doesn't strike me as very
>  formal.  I'm under no illusions that he is likely to respond to direct
>  contact either, but it should at least be attempted.
>   
Why do I need to defend myself for following, perhaps not perfectly, the normal
procedure in these cases and additionally I offered my help maintaining that package. 
I and another packager requested co-maintainership and are willing to help out, so I
really don't see why I need to defend myself for the willingness to give up my
valuable spare time.
Johannes
> josh

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Johannes Lips <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Johannes Lips
> <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >
> > You make a lot of assumptions in that statement.  People filter email
> > quite a bit and relying on bugzilla mail alone is not sufficient.
> >
> > I find it ironic that your original email said "I would like to
> > formally send a mail requesting some feedback from cicku.." but you
> > didn't bother to email him directly.  That doesn't strike me as very
> > formal.  I'm under no illusions that he is likely to respond to direct
> > contact either, but it should at least be attempted.
> >
>  Why do I need to defend myself for following, perhaps not perfectly, the normal procedure
> in these cases and additionally I offered my help maintaining that package.
>  I and another packager requested co-maintainership and are willing to help out, so I
> really don't see why I need to defend myself for the willingness to give up my
> valuable spare time. 
I asked if you had sent him an email directly and instead of doing
that you waved off my question with assumptions.  I think it's
fantastic you want to pick up the packages and I fully support that.
However your attempt to follow the process is one of many lately that
don't actually follow the process and seem to want to short-circuit to
the end result.

The purpose of having a process is to follow it because we have
reasons for doing so.  Reminding people of that is part of the deal.
Conversely, if those reasons don't make sense then perhaps we need to
revise the process.  Either way, having a discussion around it isn't
an attack that you need to defend yourself against.

josh

[Jeff Backus]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:04 AM, Johannes Lips <johannes.lips(a)gmail.com&gt;
wrote:

>  Dear all,
>
>  I would like to formally send a mail requesting some feedback from cicku
>  regarding the maintenance of the backintime package.
>  There is one open bug, which requests an update [1] and additionally a
>  trac ticket [2] was also opened, not by me.
>  I can see, that with an upgrade to later versions we'll loose the
>  differentiation between a KDE and Gnome GUI, but I don't see why that
>  really is an issue.
>  Additionally two request to become co-maintainer are unanswered so far, so
>  I hope that we'll get that sorted pretty quick.
>  Possibly there are some Chinese New Year festivities, so perhaps we'll
>  give him some more time, but I would love to get some feedback.
>
>  Johannes
>
>  [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186184
>  [2] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1542
>  
CCing Christopher.

jeff

-- 
Jeff Backus
jeff.backus(a)gmail.com
http://github.com/jsbackus

[Raphael Groner]

Another problem package cicku has to react in reasonable short time for is now docky with
FTBFS in rawhide cause of gcc6:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307430