Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Doug Goldstein <cardoe@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Developer Retirements
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:07:35
Message-Id: eafa4c130903101007w2856d00at80a816951c7b64e7@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Developer Retirements by Jeremy Olexa
1 On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o> wrote:
2
3 > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@g.o> wrote:
4 > > I'm wondering what exactly is the harm in letting developers idle for a
5 > > while? While they might not be actively committing they are still
6 > > knowledgeable people that are just as capable as everyone else to push in
7 > a
8 > > fix for small packages. There's lots of bugs in bugzilla with items that
9 > > just need someone active to commit them. There's even a lot of these
10 > items
11 > > are filed by retired Gentoo developers who could have easily pushed this
12 > fix
13 > > for all users. The fact that someone only does one commit a year does not
14 > > marginalize their contribution. While it may be small it is improving the
15 > > overall quality of the distro. I'm constantly seeing developers getting
16 > > upset over getting pushed out.
17 >
18 > The problem comes when $idle_dev has XX bugs assigned to them and they
19 > don't get resolved and no one else knows that there are issues. Then
20 > users get the attitude that they shouldn't even file bugs because no
21 > one fixes them and they just sit there.
22 >
23 > So, I agree with you as long as $idle_dev doesn't pretend to maintain
24 > packages and the team that they belong to doesn't consist of people of
25 > the same activity level. (rendering the team useless too).
26 >
27 > 2 cents,
28 > -Jeremy
29 >
30 >
31 So let's re-assign the bugs to m-needed and not nuke the person.