Subject: Re: [bug#47111] [PATCH] doc: Document the guidelines for removing inactive committers.

From: zimoun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2021 03:41:26 +0100

Hi,

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 at 20:14, Leo Famulari <[email-masked]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 01:46:35AM +0100, zimoun wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 at 15:32, Leo Famulari <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> Making it explicit, what does it mean “inactivity” in “after 12 months
>> of inactivity”?  Instead why not «after 12 months without using their
>> commit access rights»?
>
> They might have been highly active on the mailing lists and the bug
> tracker, in which case there may not be any reason to remove them. These
> are just guidelines, they will not be enforced exactly.

In the issue [1] introducing the Commit Access section, there is a
discussion.  Anyway. :-)

In my views, they do not need commit access to be active on the mailing
lists and/or the bug tracker.  The set of people with commit access
should be restricted to people who effectively commit; especially with
the authentication dance.  Well, if in the past 12 (or 18?) months, they
are not able to push couple* of patches waiting in the tracker or update
couple* of packages or push a fix or … I miss why do they need a commit
access, i.e., in my views they are inactive as committer.  It’s fine,
life happens.  And since commit access is about trust and they are
already trusted, they can request later a commit access if they are able
to be active again.

*couple meaning here 2 or more. :-)

I agree that these are just guidelines and they will not be enforced
exactly, e.g., counting the number of days of “inactivity”. :-)

Well, I am only suggesting something that appeared vague when I read
it.  Otherwise, LGTM. :-)

1: <http://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/38846>

Cheers,
simon