| 1 |
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 11:22:21AM -0500, Matthew Thode wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 18-11-02 16:05:35, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Hello, |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > The Undertakers team has frequently received various forms of |
| 6 |
> > 'criticism' of their effort in attempting to find and retire inactive |
| 7 |
> > developers. This is getting as far as to claim that we shouldn't retire |
| 8 |
> > anyone because there are no limits on commit slots. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Therefore, I would like to ask the wider community a general question: |
| 11 |
> > how do you feel about preserving commit access for people who no longer |
| 12 |
> > actively commit to Gentoo? I'm talking about extreme cases, say, |
| 13 |
> > no commits to any user-visible repository for over a year. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I'm not sure the exact time, but I think it shouldn't be user-visable, |
| 17 |
> but 'Gentoo' that should ben what's looked at. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> As far as changing the developer to a non-committing developer, what |
| 20 |
> happens if they want to come back? Would they need to retake the quiz, |
| 21 |
> re-find a mentor/recruiter, etc? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Yeah it seems like right now never-been-a-dev and |
| 24 |
was-busy-so-retired-dev have the same long path to (re)gaining full |
| 25 |
commit privs. I'd like if recruiters had some rough criteria for when |
| 26 |
you can just become a dev again easily. eg if you havent even used |
| 27 |
gentoo for years then obviously re-taking the quizzes is good. if you've |
| 28 |
still been using gentoo a ton but not developing then probably could be |
| 29 |
re-instated without anything. or if a new big EAPI happened in the |
| 30 |
meantime then just read up on the changes and you'd be all set. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- Jason |
Archives