Revamping the non responsive maintainer process

[Aleksandar Kurtakov]

It's the whole thread that implies that not your mail only. 
No one managed to explain why there should be actions against people instead of packages. I would be really thankful if someone explains how he can getter better measurement of people activity than of package maintenance problems and what is the benefit of tracking persons activity - it's not a competition it's supposed to be a collaboration and every should do as much as he can and wants.

Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondruch at redhat.com>
> To: devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 12:55:27 PM
> Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process
> 
> I don't know what are you reading in my response, but I definitely
> did
> not propose anything like "noone wants people that are ready to do
> one
> thing in a year".
> 
> Vit
> 
> 
> 
> Dne 6.11.2012 09:52, Aleksandar Kurtakov napsal(a):
> > Where is the community spirit? What went wrong with fedora
> > community? Why on earth do you people insist on tracking people
> > activity and not try detecting unmaintained packages?
> > Detecting unmaintained packages is even easier and has clearer
> > metrics.
> >
> > Really, why noone wants people that are ready to do one thing in a
> > year? Are many people here feeling superior than the rest of the
> > world and think there is no need for further contributions and
> > they can do everything alone ? I'm starting to be really worried
> > for the path Fedora is going.
> >
> > Alexander Kurtakov
> > Red Hat Eclipse team
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondruch at redhat.com>
> >> To: devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 10:28:11 AM
> >> Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process
> >>
> >> Dne 5.11.2012 10:22, Marcela Mašláňová napsal(a):
> >>> On 11/02/2012 06:57 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >>>> On 11/02/2012 04:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:44:06 +0000
> >>>>> "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 11/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>>>>>> =?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc29uIg==?=
> >>>>>>> <johannbg at gmail.com> writes:
> >>>>>>>> On 11/02/2012 03:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:12:56PM +0000, "Jóhann B.
> >>>>>>>>> Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Dead/un-maintained packages need to be removed/reassigned
> >>>>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> very *beginning* of an new development cycle so feature
> >>>>>>>>>> owners
> >>>>>>>>>> and others working in the community are dealing with
> >>>>>>>>>> active
> >>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>> actively maintained packages.
> >>>>>>> How exactly are you going to force maintainers who go missing
> >>>>>>> to do
> >>>>>>> so at a prescheduled time?  Real life is seldom that
> >>>>>>> convenient.
> >>>>>> If at this point we dont have any process that can actively
> >>>>>> tell
> >>>>>> if a
> >>>>>> maintainer is present and active within the project then we
> >>>>>> have
> >>>>>> bigger fish to fry then the feature process...
> >>>>> If we have problem A and problem B, can't we work on both at
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> same
> >>>>> time? :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Seriously it should not be anymore complex than monitoring
> >>>>>> last
> >>>>>> login
> >>>>>> into the relevant infrastructure pieces to determine if the
> >>>>>> relevant
> >>>>>> maintainer is active or not.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> bash script + a cron job should suffice to achieve just that.
> >>>>> It's not at all that simple, I'm afraid.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> How long since last activity do you consider someone 'inactive'
> >>>>> ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What if the packages that maintain simply don't need any
> >>>>> changes?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What if they are on vacation?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What if they are active on package A, but not doing something
> >>>>> on
> >>>>> package B that you wish they would?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've long wanted to revamp our process.
> >>>>> I welcome concrete proposals to do so.
> >>>>
> >>>> Surely if an individual has not logged into for several months
> >>>> into our
> >>>> infrastructure he must be inactive no?
> >>>>
> >>>> Bash script + a cron job that monitors login should suffice to
> >>>> check and
> >>>> even email him asking him to confirm if he is active encase he
> >>>> has
> >>>> a low
> >>>> maintenance component and only logs in when something is filed
> >>>> ;)
> >>>>
> >>>> JBG
> >>> No, he can own only one package and be an upstream of the
> >>> package,
> >>> therefore he will login only for update of the package.
> >>>
> >>> You are using your use-case for everyone. If you insist on
> >>> automatic
> >>> process, then the metric should work with more data.
> >>>
> >>> Marcela
> >> Requiring action every 6 months, such as pressing button "Yes, I
> >> am
> >> still alive and kicking" in FAS after you are nagged by email,
> >> would
> >> be
> >> acceptable annoyance even for such package maintainers, wouldn't
> >> be?
> >>
> >> And there is such script, which is checking user activity on
> >> several
> >> places: https://github.com/pypingou/fedora-active-user
> >>
> >> Vit
> >> --
> >> devel mailing list
> >> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> 
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel