List Archive: gentoo-council
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On Tuesday 15 January 2008, Markus Ullmann wrote:
> our retirement folks brought up a discussion about retiring people that
> do a small amount of commits (1-2 mostly) right before the 60 day period
> ends so they stay active yet are effectively slacking.
> I gave a starting idea to change the minimum amount to something like
> $count of fixed bugs per month for ebuild developers. As we have enough
> bugs that are trivial to fix this shouldn't be a real problem at the
> moment (considering we have ~6.5k bugs open excluding maintainer-wanted).
the metric for retirement lies with devrel and whatever sub projects they've
partitioned/created for these topics. the larger developer base is free to
make their opinions known to devrel on the various matters and if they feel
things are not moving in the right direction, we can review the matter. but
i would say this is hardly close to the point for us to review
> Reason that brought it to attention is the retirement bug for the
> current QA lead spb. (https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64840)
> To resolve the current situation there I gave the advice to just hold
> project lead votings that every project has to do every 12 months.
i think the rules are in place to help keep things moving smoothly. in other
words, they are guidelines which are not absolute, especially in an open
source project such as ours.
in this particular case, i would consider these facts to be self evident (and
- the current QA lead has effectively done nothing for the entire run of
holding the position
- the current QA lead is pretty inactive in many (most?) Gentoo things
- the previous QA lead was very active in constantly improving Gentoo life
- the previous QA lead would like to resume improving Gentoo life
taking these facts into consideration, the logical move would be for the
current QA lead to step down and allow the previous QA lead to step up. Mark
has more than proved his constant drive for quality. Stephen on the other
hand has done nothing of the sort.
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part.)