1 |
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 06:43 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
2 |
> On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Mike Doty wrote: |
3 |
> > Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
4 |
> > > On 12:15 Tue 15 Jan , Markus Ullmann wrote: |
5 |
> > >> our retirement folks brought up a discussion about retiring people that |
6 |
> > >> do a small amount of commits (1-2 mostly) right before the 60 day period |
7 |
> > >> ends so they stay active yet are effectively slacking. |
8 |
> > >> |
9 |
> > >> I gave a starting idea to change the minimum amount to something like |
10 |
> > >> $count of fixed bugs per month for ebuild developers. As we have enough |
11 |
> > >> bugs that are trivial to fix this shouldn't be a real problem at the |
12 |
> > >> moment (considering we have ~6.5k bugs open excluding |
13 |
> > >> maintainer-wanted). |
14 |
> > > |
15 |
> > > I don't see a good reason to turn away any amount of help, and I don't |
16 |
> > > think we should ever forcibly retire developers because of inactivity. |
17 |
> > > If we let them stay developers, they might continue contributing a few |
18 |
> > > fixes we wouldn't otherwise get, or they may become more active again in |
19 |
> > > the future. Developers are valuable people, and a lot of time has gone |
20 |
> > > into their training and experience. |
21 |
> > > |
22 |
> > > Do I think we should reassign their packages after a while, if they need |
23 |
> > > love? Sure. |
24 |
> > > |
25 |
> > > Do I think we should remove them from roles besides "ebuild developer"? |
26 |
> > > Sure. |
27 |
> > |
28 |
> > How about calling them inactive. infra will remove cvs/svn/git access |
29 |
> > and when they have time to contribute to a manner that we expect that |
30 |
> > access can be restored. |
31 |
> > |
32 |
> > Know that infra is/has been planning to automatically disable |
33 |
> > cvs/svn/git access for those who haven't committed in some time period |
34 |
> > (2 months is the current idea) |
35 |
> |
36 |
> the timeframe should follow whatever devrel is using (which i think is longer |
37 |
> than 2 months) |
38 |
|
39 |
|
40 |
Any automated disconnects of cvs/svn/git would be done in conjunction |
41 |
with the policy/desires that devrel takes. As is 60 days is what |
42 |
triggers slacker alerts. That used to be 90 days but I think they |
43 |
discovered along the way that even ~90 days was to long of a time frame. |
44 |
|
45 |
Infra's only desire/care in this matter would be that we are not fans of |
46 |
leaving open security holes. Every dev is considered a security risk. |
47 |
That risk is perceived maximized by inactivity. More or less.. use it or |
48 |
lose it.. (note infra is strictly talking about flipping bits in ldap to |
49 |
disable write access to those repositories) and not fully automated |
50 |
retirements. |
51 |
|
52 |
-- |
53 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> |
54 |
Gentoo Linux |
55 |
|
56 |
-- |
57 |
gentoo-council@l.g.o mailing list |