Kevin Fenzi wrote:
"Michael" == Michael J Knox <michael@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Michael> Michael J Knox wrote: [snip] check out the achive for the
Michael> rest ;)
Let's start with X, maximum packager response time for a bugzilla
ticket, in which a serious (or normal) bug was reported. Would
X=14 days be too short? X+Y would cover at least two weekends. I
mean, if a packager is on a long vacation (several weeks or more)
and is neglecting package maintenance knowingly, the package would
be suitable for shared maintainership anyway. And in cases where a
packager has had an accident or is facing temporary illness (and
similar things), we're back at what I've written before -- that it
should be in the packager's best interest that other contributors
help.
I feel, that if an owner is considered "active" then he/she should
be able to at the very least, acknowledge a form of contact, direct
email or BZ, within a 3 week time frame. However, I think it needs
to be more than one attempt over that time frame. The person
attempting the NMU must provide "proof" IMHO in the form of BZ
reports etc of these attempts. A formal accounacment of intent on
the extras list would be required, in case someone on the list
knows the current owner where abouts.
Michael> Ok, So I have somemore time to focus on this.
Michael> So far I have only had comments from Michael Schwendt, but I
Michael> would like to hear more from other FE maitainers.
Michael> What sorts of time frames do people think is reasonable? How
Michael> many contact attempts should there be?
How about something like:
- When someone sees that a maintainer isn't answering their bugs, not
answering rebuild requests, emails or the like, they file a bug
against the package in bugzilla asking for the maintainer to respond.
This bug should list the outstanding issues they need to address.
- After every 7 days, the reporter adds a comment to the bug asking
again for response. Others can add to the bug that they also were not
successfull in contacting the maintainer, or providing additional
contact information for the maintainer (ie, alternative email, irc,
etc).
- After 2 attempts (2 weeks) of no response from the maintainer, the
reporter posts to the fedora-extras list with a url to the bug report
and asks if anyone knows how to contact the maintainer.
- After another 7 days (now 3 weeks total), the reporter posts to the
extras list with the bug link and indicates that all attempts to
contact the maintainer have failed and that they wish to take over the
package. Additionally we could require the former maintainers sponsor
to sign off on the change.
I think the bug is important to be able to track things, and the
maintainer should follow email from bugzilla for their packages
anyhow.
That's exactly how I foresee the process, but probably a 4 week wait.
I am not sure the reasoning for having the previous sponsor resign off
on the package when it should be required that the NMU be done onl by
existing FE developers.
Michael
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
