1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
Sebastian, |
5 |
|
6 |
On 02-07-2010 13:51, Sebastian Pipping wrote: |
7 |
> Jorge, |
8 |
> |
9 |
> |
10 |
> On 06/30/10 05:05, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: |
11 |
>> The following is a list with a few reasons to retire inactive developers: |
12 |
>> |
13 |
>> * security considerations regarding access to Gentoo infra, including |
14 |
>> tampering of the tree |
15 |
>> * need to ensure that maintainers are accessible, take care of |
16 |
>> packages and bugs and that they reply on due time to community |
17 |
>> contacts and requests |
18 |
>> * desire to have project and team membership, as well as package |
19 |
>> maintenance reflect reality |
20 |
>> * make it clear what areas of the project are understaffed and what |
21 |
>> packages require new maintainers |
22 |
>> * need to ensure that developers keep up to date regarding policies |
23 |
>> and use of the tree by using it |
24 |
> |
25 |
> interesting, thanks for elaborating. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> I wonder if we could start making a stronger distinction between these |
28 |
> two cases of retirement. If it isn't a throw-out I would prefer to have |
29 |
> that made so very clear that no one ever feels thrown out that way. |
30 |
> Especially that there's no guarantee to be allowed to return feels a bit |
31 |
> odd to me. |
32 |
|
33 |
please read the undertakers page and the resolution of the retirement |
34 |
bugs carefully as you seem to be confused about our policy to retired |
35 |
developers. The only case where re-admittance is subject to particular |
36 |
scrutiny is when a developer is retired for disciplinary reasons. As you |
37 |
can read in the second email template[1], we specifically inform the |
38 |
developer that: |
39 |
|
40 |
"If we do retire you, it's pretty easy to come back when you are ready. |
41 |
Just do the ebuild/end-quiz again and you're back on. You also always |
42 |
have the option of contributing as your schedule allows via proxy or |
43 |
bugzilla." |
44 |
|
45 |
We also make sure to mention in the retirement bugs that a developer can |
46 |
always return as seen on an example bug[2]. My apologies to Caleb to |
47 |
link directly to his bug, but I needed one concrete reply to show |
48 |
undertakers work. |
49 |
|
50 |
|
51 |
[1] - http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/undertakers/retirement-second.txt |
52 |
[2] - https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=317071#c1 |
53 |
|
54 |
> Best, |
55 |
> |
56 |
> |
57 |
> Sebastian |
58 |
> |
59 |
|
60 |
- -- |
61 |
Regards, |
62 |
|
63 |
Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org |
64 |
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections |
65 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
66 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) |
67 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ |
68 |
|
69 |
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMLoPKAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEP9nMP/28b1mR+kZe1zJZb7nzeTHLg |
70 |
bqfdCgiTQd0uqNWWX2scgPQRE1hsv9RtJp3y8CCvvu3aYhVi4hBDXCPm/2NTiFqf |
71 |
T5dWKtH9nPi5+27CXUsEwQFlV0miTp1o8I2tSOq7IuadIjbib92Yq60Z3xnqA1fX |
72 |
bf+shP3lBGpR8ReDEzE9gEIWHG91/9a95iZA21dsxNoO7ev8rFS9ixKZ1I83ZEp8 |
73 |
xA+H2RTaNHXbwD7P3fi6Vn+xBckNnIEHWQeQGEpdi+EzYYzFyMdCiaOnOPiZFj/N |
74 |
n0hEOqqmrLEVGXNrPNB12kM/v35G+yX01qM4AFzpDwNWehxOX8ZxI1u/5frJ3J5M |
75 |
RNDMBy9W7FGEd0MMqYS/ndQftxpn5OOj+Y1BUXjVJcUv0+K6JGOuO+AApcrJyBX7 |
76 |
MuQrEMKmGZ0ZvL+AKxyAAkS4xztcLqDzvq7xAXS7S9YQ2EVKwXnYazcaa4WAyOyd |
77 |
UyFdUOHUKSXy41wwWzOrXds7tZgmcgatT8+eP+BvIAvIJZti05YVRmDd4pFhOl9u |
78 |
YehAx3rzuBHnyWO32Ycmr5GbBjKD0YqA5eZl9cwoBBPGazioYZXWIxMGXlNBK94o |
79 |
ZF7n5JAt49EzogXXA5769t7xU0g89WpWDc+nESjl9zq51yvQXpwrQuGDh6CDsij/ |
80 |
xd/jnWuAa0YMxkXu4hWQ |
81 |
=E13T |
82 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |