Hyrum K Wright wrote on Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 09:29:47 -0600: > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 5:04 AM, Julian Foad <julian.f...@wandisco.com> wrote: > > Daniel Shahaf wrote: > >> I'd rather not remove their entries entirely from COMMITTERS. > > > > +1. Being unable to contact them (currently) is a completely different > > thing from deciding to remove them from the list of committers. And > > failure to keep one's email address up to date is not a serious breach > > of committership responsibilities, for an inactive or infrequent > > committer, I'd say. > > Oh, I'm not claiming we do some irrevocable revocation of their commit > privileges.
I didn't think you were suggesting anything of that sort. However, removing names from COMMITTERS seems like we dismiss our own historical contributors. I'd prefer to move them to a "dormant committers" or "uncontactable committers" or "emeriti" section. > The fact is that they just don't currently *have* commit > access. They couldn't even commit if they wanted to, due to the lack > of an account at the ASF. > > I don't think we have to forget these folks (who have obviously given > valuable contributions in the past), just that it makes little sense > to call them committers, since they can't commit. > I suppose we could mark somehow those who don't have commit access to /repos/asf/subversion. > >> Just remove the (now-bogus) email addresses perhaps? > > > > Only if you're sure the email addresses are permanently defunct and not > > merely temporarily rejecting our attempts to contact them. > > We could cross this list with a similar one I sent to private@ a few > months ago when trying to contact the various translators. > > -Hyrum
