----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johan...@gmail.com>
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2012 9:20:05 PM
> Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process
> 
> On 11/02/2012 06:27 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
> > Wrong. Do you know how few of the problems we see in Eclipse land
> > don't need fixes upstreams? And some of these issues require
> > man/months (years sometimes) upstream before there is smth to show
> > in Fedora. Don't make your assumptions based on that. So if one
> > logs in every few months to take a look at the number of bugs
> > (nothing more) he is active but one that does fixes upstream for
> > months before putting into Fedora is not. You see there is no
> > black and white here!
> 
> Then that individual would simply log in or perform some other action
> to
> get him off that list...
> 
> > Plus, did you intentionally skipped the part about being active on
> > A but not on B ? So if one does a good job of maintaining 9
> > packages but doesn't do it for 1 because he/she is overloaded we
> > should dump him? And please don't tell me that a good maintainer
> > would not do that because many of us don't know the count(not the
> > names) of the things they are responsible for so it's more than
> > easier for a component to goes unnoticed.
> 
> No I simply assumed that he would have logged in to fiddle with one
> or
> more packages he owns and or is responsible for which would clearly
> mark
> him *active*.
> 
> I know my English sucks on a good day but i thought it was clear I
> was
> speaking of checking logins in our infrastructure not *packages* or
> number of packages* maintainer might maintain since that's totally
> irrelevant and just brings unnecessary complication to the equation
> from
> my pov...
> 
> Instead of people constant bringing up hypothetical solution while we
> have plethora of unmaintained rotten packages in our repos why dont
> you
> try to come up with or propose an alternative solution to the problem
> at
> hand...

I already wrote it:

All of this was to show that whatever policy might be chosen it should be PER 
PROJECT/PACKAGE not per maintainer.

The whole idea of non-responsive maintainer is nonsense. A person that does one 
thing in a year is still more valuable than a hundred of freeloaders - because 
he/she actually did one thing. We ship packages so every action should be per 
package and not per person! 

Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team



> 
> JBG
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to