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

From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 11:05:14 +0100

Hi Leo,

Leo Famulari <[email-masked]> skribis:

> How about this:
>
> "In order to reduce the possibility of mistakes, committers will have
> ..."

I like this.

> On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 09:07:16AM +0100, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
>> Also, about my second suggestion at the end of the message, I want to
>> make it clear that regaining commit access is trivial, and does not
>> imply another vouching process (IIUC), i.e., "you can ask to..." sounds
>> like it could be refused.
>
> It could be refused. It really depends on the situation, and the
> decision is at the discretion of the maintainers. In many cases a simple
> "Hi, I'm back!" email will be enough, but the text I propose is not
> offering a guarantee.

Perhaps, after “they can ask to regain commit access by emailing the
maintainers” we can add “without going through the vouching process”?
Would that address your concerns, Nicolas?

To be clear, I think this would be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
I expect that by far the most frequent situation would be one where
maintainers know the person and immediately restore their access.  In
other cases, as the project gets older, maintainers could feel the need
to go through the regular contribution and vouching process.

IOW, I think this process should be as smooth as possible, but we should
not suggest it’s automatic.

Thoughts?

Ludo’.