On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 11:55:31PM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote: > On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I would like to request a short-circuit of the Non-responsive > > Maintainer process, for Mihai Ibanescu, FAS account 'misa', formerly a > > Red Hat employee. > > Sort of +1. We need some sort of policy for former RH'ers, with the > understanding that not all of them will abandon their Fedora > responsibilities when leaving RH. David Woodhouse is an excellent > example of this. > > However, where the circumstances make it clear that they have no > intent to continue maintenance of their Fedora packages, such as here, > I don't think that the entire process need be invoked. > > I also don't want this to devolve into a "Red Hat vs. community" > thing, whereby we have different standards for folks that are or were > employed by Red Hat vs. folks who aren't, so any policy that we come > up with for fast-tracking the non-responsive process (which I think > can be appropriate in circumstances such as this) needs to be broadly > applicable, I agree completely. Should the same happen to a Dell employee who happens to also maintain packages in Fedora, should they both leave Dell and stop actively maintaining their packages, I would expect others from Dell who are aware that person has left to step up and ack the NRM request. If Mihai had updated his FAS account with an active email address, I'd be happy to send mails there. As it stands, the address is a non-functional @redhat.com address, with no good way to reach him, and clearly no maintainence on his part in years. -- Matt Domsch Linux Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
