Automating the NonResponsiveMaintainers policy

Marcela Mašláňová mmaslano at
Fri Mar 2 11:53:37 UTC 2012

On 03/02/2012 12:12 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 03/02/2012 11:02 AM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
>> Ok, so you'll automatically start non-responsive maintainer process,
>> because maintainer didn't work on a one bug. But he might be working on
>> different component for whole month. He might be working on a new
>> upstream release and not paying attention to low priority bugzillas.
>> You should take more parameters than one bug to kick someone from Fedora.
> This is based on more then one bug against one component and through
> observation in several release cycles.
> If an maintainer does not want to be affected by the automatic non
> responsive process all he would have to do would simply be something
> like changing the report status from new to assigned and leave feed back
> on it.

You didn't consider people or pseudousers, who are assigned to packages
with dozens of bugs. Also some developers are using NEW as their state
for something.

I'm afraid we end up with more bureaucracy than we have now. I'm not
against tracking some statistics, so you can look up who is active and
probably will answer in few days, but I'd rather not use it for the
unresponsive process.


More information about the devel mailing list