It's the whole thread that implies that not your mail only. No one managed to explain why there should be actions against people instead of packages. I would be really thankful if someone explains how he can getter better measurement of people activity than of package maintenance problems and what is the benefit of tracking persons activity - it's not a competition it's supposed to be a collaboration and every should do as much as he can and wants. Alexander Kurtakov Red Hat Eclipse team ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> > To: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 12:55:27 PM > Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process > > I don't know what are you reading in my response, but I definitely > did > not propose anything like "noone wants people that are ready to do > one > thing in a year". > > Vit > > > > Dne 6.11.2012 09:52, Aleksandar Kurtakov napsal(a): > > Where is the community spirit? What went wrong with fedora > > community? Why on earth do you people insist on tracking people > > activity and not try detecting unmaintained packages? > > Detecting unmaintained packages is even easier and has clearer > > metrics. > > > > Really, why noone wants people that are ready to do one thing in a > > year? Are many people here feeling superior than the rest of the > > world and think there is no need for further contributions and > > they can do everything alone ? I'm starting to be really worried > > for the path Fedora is going. > > > > Alexander Kurtakov > > Red Hat Eclipse team > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> To: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 10:28:11 AM > >> Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process > >> > >> Dne 5.11.2012 10:22, Marcela Mašláňová napsal(a): > >>> On 11/02/2012 06:57 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > >>>> On 11/02/2012 04:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:44:06 +0000 > >>>>> "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On 11/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >>>>>>> =?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc29uIg==?= > >>>>>>> <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>>>>>>> On 11/02/2012 03:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:12:56PM +0000, "Jóhann B. > >>>>>>>>> Guðmundsson" wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> Dead/un-maintained packages need to be removed/reassigned > >>>>>>>>>> at > >>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>> very *beginning* of an new development cycle so feature > >>>>>>>>>> owners > >>>>>>>>>> and others working in the community are dealing with > >>>>>>>>>> active > >>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>> actively maintained packages. > >>>>>>> How exactly are you going to force maintainers who go missing > >>>>>>> to do > >>>>>>> so at a prescheduled time? Real life is seldom that > >>>>>>> convenient. > >>>>>> If at this point we dont have any process that can actively > >>>>>> tell > >>>>>> if a > >>>>>> maintainer is present and active within the project then we > >>>>>> have > >>>>>> bigger fish to fry then the feature process... > >>>>> If we have problem A and problem B, can't we work on both at > >>>>> the > >>>>> same > >>>>> time? :) > >>>>> > >>>>>> Seriously it should not be anymore complex than monitoring > >>>>>> last > >>>>>> login > >>>>>> into the relevant infrastructure pieces to determine if the > >>>>>> relevant > >>>>>> maintainer is active or not. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> bash script + a cron job should suffice to achieve just that. > >>>>> It's not at all that simple, I'm afraid. > >>>>> > >>>>> How long since last activity do you consider someone 'inactive' > >>>>> ? > >>>>> > >>>>> What if the packages that maintain simply don't need any > >>>>> changes? > >>>>> > >>>>> What if they are on vacation? > >>>>> > >>>>> What if they are active on package A, but not doing something > >>>>> on > >>>>> package B that you wish they would? > >>>>> > >>>>> I've long wanted to revamp our process. > >>>>> I welcome concrete proposals to do so. > >>>> > >>>> Surely if an individual has not logged into for several months > >>>> into our > >>>> infrastructure he must be inactive no? > >>>> > >>>> Bash script + a cron job that monitors login should suffice to > >>>> check and > >>>> even email him asking him to confirm if he is active encase he > >>>> has > >>>> a low > >>>> maintenance component and only logs in when something is filed > >>>> ;) > >>>> > >>>> JBG > >>> No, he can own only one package and be an upstream of the > >>> package, > >>> therefore he will login only for update of the package. > >>> > >>> You are using your use-case for everyone. If you insist on > >>> automatic > >>> process, then the metric should work with more data. > >>> > >>> Marcela > >> Requiring action every 6 months, such as pressing button "Yes, I > >> am > >> still alive and kicking" in FAS after you are nagged by email, > >> would > >> be > >> acceptable annoyance even for such package maintainers, wouldn't > >> be? > >> > >> And there is such script, which is checking user activity on > >> several > >> places: https://github.com/pypingou/fedora-active-user > >> > >> Vit > >> -- > >> devel mailing list > >> devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
