forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thorsten Scherler <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] remove active/inactive concept
Date Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:14:37 GMT
El vie, 21-04-2006 a las 11:17 +0200, Ferdinand Soethe escribió:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> >>>However, if someone wants to periodically verify the active status of 
> >>>people (i.e. once a month) then the "time out" definition is workable. 
> >>>But who is going to do this? (hint - *not* me)
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Probably a job for the PMC chair.
> I'd probably aim for a different approach.
> Instead of checking for activity (which is always hard to gauge) have
> committers tell us if they are absent for a holiday. That way we can
> assume that everybody who has not told doesn't care while we can also
> extend voting periods on important decisions to accommodate holidays.

I am not sure. If we do so then we should extend this to general absence
or time constraints. 


"Together we stand, divided we fall!" 
Hey you (Pink Floyd)

View raw message