Re: MIA Maintainer Process Proposal
On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 01:58:20PM -0500, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
>
> Suggested time / minimum activity guidelines:
>
> Package upload once in 4 months
> or
> Active on Debian lists / IRC channels in last 3 months.
> Reasonable reply times for NMU:
>
> Security issues: immediate response ( < 24 hours )
Your times are completely absurd (no offense intended). Plus, I think
you forgot that if a maintainer emails <some place official> saying "I
am going on a sabatical, I will be out for 6 months" they should get
some leeway.
IMO, 8 months of innactivity, without notice from the maintainer, or any
reply upon emailing them for 4 weeks, should go into an "innactive"
state. After that, they get reavaluated in 6 months. If still no reply,
then they are considered gone. If they reply during the innactivity and
respond in the positive that they had <insert excuse> issue, and plan to
continue working, gpg signed, then they get reactivated. I don't think
we should be picky about their excuse. Maybe they just didn't feel up to
the task, or maybe they lie to us because the real excuse is too
embarassing. Either way, the fact that they respond is good enough for
me...and I would accept their account being reactivated.
This may not be perfect, but I think the general approach is good, and
some comments could probably fine tune the specifics (and maybe point
out anything I missed).
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: