Re: (semi-)automatic unclaim of packages with more than 2 weeks of inactivity (and missing DLAs on www.do)
Hi,
On 31/08/2020 14:44, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 12:59:54PM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
>> Still in this particular case, in our process the team coordinator cites
>> contributors by running a heuristic-based script, and forwarding it
>> verbatim to the team (and the whole Internet), so I believe this isn't a
>> case where the contributor would need to learn to cope, but a case where
>> public naming is error-prone and not appropriate. Hence why I replaced
>> the last-committer name with package+date for missing website imports.
>>
>> That being said, I think the current process for reporting stalled and
>> multiples claims is good enough as-is :)
>
> I don't understand why you think naming people and package names is ok
> for stalled updates and multiple claims but not for stalled announcements.
> could you please explain and make me understand?
I consider each separately and I can write a detailed rationale, but I
feel out-of-place doing so (I'm not the one designing and justifying the
procedures), and 10 days with no activity feels a bit long to resume
this kind of thread.
Cheers!
Sylvain
Reply to: