On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 6:30 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." <phajdan...@gentoo.org> wrote: > 3. I think what's important is to keep packages maintained. I consider > maintainership to be a duty, not a privilege. If someone is listed in > metadata.xml, but is not really maintaining the package, that creates a > formal illusion that the package is maintained, and may prevent other > people from stepping up and taking maintenance of that package. > > 4. I suggest that we focus on the above: keeping packages maintained. > Taking packages out of hands of inactive/overworked maintainers is good. > They can always become _more_ active, which is easier if they retain cvs > access. If they make a single commit every 3-6 months, I'm fine with > that as long as things are maintained properly.
+1000. The point is not to retire developers. To point is to make sure we have a clear picture of what packages are (somewhat actively) being maintained. Perhaps the undertakers project (or some other project) should focus more on package maintenance history than activity history. Cheers, Dirkjan
