Automating the NonResponsiveMaintainers policy
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
johannbg at gmail.com
Fri Mar 2 11:56:18 UTC 2012
On 03/02/2012 11:16 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Actually I support such initiative. We have also filled a few bugs
> against Ruby components which needs some love due to Ruby update and
> it happens that we have no response. If there would be tool that
> reports "yes, the maintainer was active in some Fedora project 3 days
> ago", then it would be meaningful to nag him again, because the BZ was
> probably somewhere lost/forgotten, but if you see that the maintainer
> have been non-active for last 6 months, you know that you should
> probably start "NonResponsiveMaintainer" process.
Yeah I suspected that I was not alone in this regard since I am just
dealing with ca 5% of packages in the distribution.
This could be beneficial in various project processes although I'm not
familiar with how FPC ensures that FPG is being followed and is updated
each time changes are made to the guidelines but let's assume they are
using this workflow.
FPC makes changes to FPG -->
They then generate a list of packages affected by the change to FPG -->
They then file a report against all the component on the list were they
state that the relevant package is affected by the change made by FPG
and the spec file should be updated accordingly and maintainers should
comment if they would they require the assistant of proven packager do
to those changes for them and those changes should preferable be
completed by this $DATE -->
A week ( or some other time ) later the component gets hit by the
automatic non responsive policy which would allow proven packager only
have to walk through components that have not been flagged non
responsive and check if maintainers have asked for their assistant thus
focusing their available time and energy only on responsive and actively
More information about the devel