forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] remove active/inactive concept
Date Fri, 21 Apr 2006 08:36:39 GMT
David Crossley wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:


>>With respect to whether we define active or not, I prefer to do less 
>>admin work, not more. So I am in favour of removing the distinction. We 
>>should keep emeritus status. People should be able to opt to be emeritus 
>>or the PMC can choose to request that someone become emeritus, such a 
>>request can be refused.
> They certainly should be able to opt to be emeritus,
> like NKB did recently.
> However, i don't understand why the PMC might ever
> need to request that. Did you have a potential
> situation in mind?

Not a specific situation, and thinking about it any potential situation 
I can invent is already covered by the provision that enables PMC 
members to remove a PMC member. Interestingly, I have never seen happen 
in an Apache project, however, we do need this security.

>>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.

It's a job that is quite onerous and would be one that would make me 
think long and hard about being Chair since I don't see the workload 
outweighing the benefits. Of course, if it were automated, negative 
results being followed up manually it would be more acceptable. But then 
the issue is, who will automate it?

It is worth noting that a number of projects use this kind of measure 
for inactivity. Scripts for this purpose would be useful across the ASF. 
If only I had the time.


View raw message