Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Sebastian Pipping <sping@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 00:12:57
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo by "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto"

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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] The mis-concept of "slacking" in Gentoo "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvicetto@g.o>