1 |
Hi, |
2 |
|
3 |
TL;DR: if developers don't reply in 2 weeks from first mail, their |
4 |
commit access is temporarily disabled. It is reenabled immediately |
5 |
on request from the (returning) developer. All other points in |
6 |
retirement timeframe are shifted forward to provide twice as much time |
7 |
as currently. |
8 |
|
9 |
|
10 |
Currently, the retirement timeframe roughly includes: |
11 |
|
12 |
1. Sending first mail after 2+ months of inactivity (usually 4+), |
13 |
|
14 |
2. For developers with commit access, if developer *does not reply*: |
15 |
|
16 |
2a. Reassigning packages in 2+ weeks. |
17 |
|
18 |
3. For everyone, while the developer *is still inactive*: |
19 |
|
20 |
3a. Sending second mail 4 months after the first mail. |
21 |
|
22 |
3b. Sending third mail 1 month later. |
23 |
|
24 |
3c. Retiring 1 month later. |
25 |
|
26 |
Those times are just minimal requirements, we wait longer |
27 |
if the developer is away, has problems, etc. However, they kinda suck |
28 |
for people truly MIA, since it implies that it takes 8-10 months before |
29 |
unused commit access is disabled. They also suck for people who need |
30 |
more away time and don't want to lose developer status. |
31 |
|
32 |
|
33 |
Following earlier discussion and comments, I'd like to propose to change |
34 |
the timeline to: |
35 |
|
36 |
1. Sending first mail after 2+ months of inactivity (usually 4+), |
37 |
|
38 |
2. For developers with commit access, if developer *does not reply*: |
39 |
|
40 |
2a. Disabling commit access in 2 weeks. |
41 |
|
42 |
2b. Reassigning packages in 4+ weeks. |
43 |
|
44 |
3. For everyone, while the developer *is still inactive*: |
45 |
|
46 |
3a. Sending second mail 6 months after the first mail. |
47 |
|
48 |
3b. Sending third mail 3 months later. |
49 |
|
50 |
3c. Sending fourth mail 2 months later. |
51 |
|
52 |
3d. Retiring 1 month later. |
53 |
|
54 |
|
55 |
The main changes are: |
56 |
|
57 |
a. Commit access is disabled 2 weeks after first mail if developer does |
58 |
not reply (and does not commit). It can be quickly reenabled on |
59 |
developer's return. |
60 |
|
61 |
b. The retirement process takes 12 months instead of 6 months since |
62 |
first-mail. |
63 |
|
64 |
c. Additional mail is added to the process to reduce the risk that |
65 |
developer misses some, and times are increased from 4,1,1 to 6,3,2,1. |
66 |
This gives developer more time, and improves pinging process. |
67 |
|
68 |
|
69 |
Note that in the original discussion, making the commit access switch |
70 |
automated was discussed. However, no progress has been made on this, |
71 |
so I'm sending the original proposal that requires no technical changes. |
72 |
|
73 |
WDYT? |
74 |
|
75 |
-- |
76 |
Best regards, |
77 |
Michał Górny |