Jorge,


On 06/17/10 03:10, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> So everyone can have an idea, I'd suggest looking at the list of the
> open retirement bugs[1].
> As there seems to be some confusion about the policies to retire
> developers, please read the undertakers page[2].

Interesting links, thanks.


Two things come to my mind:  Step 2 of the undertakers page reads:

  "When sending an email to the developer in question, make sure you
   tell him, that he might get retired due to being inactive."

If I'm not mistaken this is telling the developer about potential
retirement on first direct contact.  If that's true I don't consider it
very sensitive.  After all our goal is to keep that developer in, not
out.  So my proposal is:  please add another two weeks and a second mail
so the first one does not mention retirement.  How about that?


The other thing is: what are the reasons to retire inactive developers?
Are these reasons documented somewhere?

Thanks!



Sebastian