On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 09:20:22 -0500, JLTI (Jason) wrote: > MS> Forcing sponsors to fulfill such criteria is the wrong way IMO. It > MS> may result in even more blanket-approval sponsorships. > > I don't happen to agree, but at some point shouldn't sponsors do > something? Are we talking past eachother? :-/ What if sponsors _try_ but for some time haven't found anyone who shows enough interest in the Fedora Packaging? Or, for example, recently I've rejected sponsorship for someone, who used strong language when referring to Fedora's packaging related requirements (and, uhm, this time the person has not even tried to excuse/explain, so no chance to get to know that person). In another case, I've worked on multiple review requests by the same person, but silently (= without communication), the person was sponsored by somebody else without following the sponsor's guidelines. Months later, the packages have still not been reviewed or approved, and I've had to mail the sponsor privately to sort this out. What if there are sponsors with expertise in special areas, who are available to help'n'sponsor other contributors in such areas only? What if sponsors have become more careful and want to observe a potential contributor's long-term commitment first? For example, what to think about people, whose email address doesn't appear anywhere else in bugzilla other than in the single package review request? > Otherwise why do they have permission? What do you suggest > as expanded criteria for keeping sponsor access? Or do you advocate no > criteria at all, and sponsorship is lost by vote? Or are you saying it > should never be lost once gained? What do you gain by removing sponsors so violently? For me it would be like slamming a door into my face, and I would likely discontinue spending time on visiting bookmarked pages like http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html and the normal review request queue. Sponsors can leave the group in FAS themselves. Send out a reminder to all sponsors, which you consider "inactive or not active enough", and ask them to decide whether they think they will not be sponsoring anyone in the future anymore (e.g. due to time-constraints or lack of interest). -- Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) - Linux 3.3.2-8.fc17.x86_64 loadavg: 0.08 0.07 0.06 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
