[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Handling of (inactive) Debian Accounts




"Joerg Jaspert" <joerg@debian.org> wrote in message 87hctsn59w.fsf@vorlon.ganneff.de">news:87hctsn59w.fsf@vorlon.ganneff.de...
On 10927 March 1977, Mark Purcell wrote:

On Saturday 10 February 2007 01:34, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Selection of the people included in those runs will be done in a way
that we avoid sending out such mails to active people. As a good start
we will take the upcoming DPL vote as an input source, everyone who doesn't
vote this year will be included in the first run.

 * Please note that you can vote without expressing an opinion! *
Whilst you might be able to vote without expressing an opinion,
we already have a documented MIA process.
http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-beyond-pkging.en.html#s-mia-qa

If you read my mail you will find out that We know this and its planned
to take that as source for future/additional runs.

I don't think using the single criteria such as DPL voting is a good,
approach.

Now, explain where the problem in my approach is? The worst case that
can happen to someone who does not vote is that he replies to one
mail. Its not as if not voting means immediate account deactivation...


I would hope that there would be a grace period after deactivation, where a person who misses the WaT mail, and then later has his/her account disabled can quickly speak up and say they are still here, and be re-enabled without having to go through any sort of NM process.



Reply to: