| 1 |
On 18-11-02 16:05:35, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hello, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> The Undertakers team has frequently received various forms of |
| 5 |
> 'criticism' of their effort in attempting to find and retire inactive |
| 6 |
> developers. This is getting as far as to claim that we shouldn't retire |
| 7 |
> anyone because there are no limits on commit slots. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Therefore, I would like to ask the wider community a general question: |
| 10 |
> how do you feel about preserving commit access for people who no longer |
| 11 |
> actively commit to Gentoo? I'm talking about extreme cases, say, |
| 12 |
> no commits to any user-visible repository for over a year. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I'm not sure the exact time, but I think it shouldn't be user-visable, |
| 16 |
but 'Gentoo' that should ben what's looked at. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
As far as changing the developer to a non-committing developer, what |
| 19 |
happens if they want to come back? Would they need to retake the quiz, |
| 20 |
re-find a mentor/recruiter, etc? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Matthew Thode (prometheanfire) |
Archives