1 |
Hi, |
2 |
|
3 |
On Fri, 02 Nov 2018 16:05:35 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: |
4 |
> Hello, |
5 |
> |
6 |
> The Undertakers team has frequently received various forms of |
7 |
> 'criticism' of their effort in attempting to find and retire inactive |
8 |
> developers. This is getting as far as to claim that we shouldn't retire |
9 |
> anyone because there are no limits on commit slots. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> Therefore, I would like to ask the wider community a general question: |
12 |
> how do you feel about preserving commit access for people who no longer |
13 |
> actively commit to Gentoo? I'm talking about extreme cases, say, |
14 |
> no commits to any user-visible repository for over a year. |
15 |
|
16 |
Due to security concerns one year of inactivity is a fair margin for |
17 |
retirement, but AFAIK with current policy undertakers may become |
18 |
active after 2 months of inactivity and are quite active after half |
19 |
a year. |
20 |
|
21 |
Also care should be taken to account indirect commits, e.g. when |
22 |
developer in question is author, but not commiter. This may happen |
23 |
due to many reasons, e.g. review and commit by a maintainer which |
24 |
is another dev. |
25 |
|
26 |
Best regards, |
27 |
Andrew Savchenko |