On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 05:38:58AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> If it's going to be automated, does it behoove us to also send
> automated mails to DDs that are getting close to the two-year limit,
> warning them? Or is it your view that 2 years without activity is
> so far beyond what's reasonable that there's no reason to give such
> a warning?
I think that the time framework is large enough not to have a
warning. However, unless there is a strong demand to clarify this
details, I believe that they should be left to DAM. We resolve about
the principle: to be in this project you need to be active and that
you stop being in the project if you stay inactive for too long.
> You also seem to be suggesting that returning to Debian after being
> auto-MIAed should be a trivial process ("the day you'll re-gain
> interest, you can come back"). That's a departure from our current
> process, which requires those who go MIA to re-submit themselves to
> the NM process. If it *is* your position that MIAed developers
> should have an easier time getting back into the project
Right, that's an important point, thanks for asking. I don't think
that coming back after a long period of inactivity without a word
should be too easy. Actually, that's why the proposal explicitly avoid
using the "emeritus" status, which is our "easy" way to come back.
If you are inactive and don't care to let the project know about that
for too long, your account should be disabled (maybe keeping @d.o for
a while). From there, in my opinion, you can either appeal to DAM to
become emeritus, or you will start from scratch as in the MIA process.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature