Policy for non-responsive maintainers

[Anish Mangal]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 10 January 2013 01:52 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Bernie Innocenti <bernie at codewiz.org> wrote:
>> Is this a good time to re-spin the discussion? Considering that it keeps
>> coming up:
>
> +1
>
> Let's get a policy defined and a means of execution. (On the ASLO
> front, there are many of us who can help with the transfer of
> management. Gitorious is another story...
>
> -walter
>>
>> <lionaneesh-andro> bernie: Could you help me takeover maintainership
of an inactive activity?
>> <bernie> lionaneesh-andro: ask alsroot, he maintains aslo
>> * alsroot only maintains aslo, dirakx was taking care about aslo content
>> <bernie> lionaneesh-andro: gonzalo_odiard and garycmartin are the
activity team coordinators.
>> <bernie> lionaneesh-andro: there's currently no written process for
taking over an unmaintained activity. maybe ask them for permission first?

Unless the original maintainer wants out, I'd call it co-maintainership
rather than takeover-of-maintainership.

I guess one version could be:
* Request the original maintainer for co-maintainership

* Wait for X amount of time

* If he responds, great! - follow that
** If you don't agree with his response, you are free to branch off your
own spin of the activity

* If he doesn't respond, add the Requester as a co-maintainer.
** ASLO: add as author
** GIT: tag the current snapshot of the code (maybe clone or create a
branch), and give commit access on mainline.

>>
>> <bernie> lionaneesh-andro: please, write to sugar-devel@ and cc me,
alsroot, gonzalo and gary.
>> <lionaneesh-andro> bernie: okay. Thanks.
>>
>> On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 19:04 -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 14:27 -0300, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
>>>> If you are not in a hurry to get this discussed,
>>>> I propose wait until we finish we 0.98 (one month aprox)
>>>> Right now, all the people we want be involved in this discussion,
>>>> are too busy (me too).
>>>
>>> There's no particular hurry.
>>>
>>> Actually, I brought up this particular issue just to make a more general
>>> point: we should codify our existing practices in the wiki for the
>>> benefit of new and existing contributors. Being swamped by an unclear
>>> process can be quite frustrating for a volunteer who just wants to get
>>> things done.
>>>
>>>
>>>> About the summer young hackaton in Uruguay, I take your word.
>>>
>>> Glad to help, although it's unlikely that I'll be able to join in.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> _ // Bernie Innocenti
>> \X/ http://codewiz.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


- -- 
Anish Mangal
Sugar Labs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQ7xDBAAoJEBoxUdDHDZVpDKIIAIZyUbd6l8HiRofnk3W23azg
NzJ08zBU+E+KnjgB3mw2jGcwqL8M+T1wXGTF5bvAqsFwwkcaxYShMGiMeBID7PvI
0jlpfERzMlzg4kLyo6K2yIuguvMfYUh7PI7yhfs4Z0+Ip3yBGzsnzdazsU7Hmobb
uJreL+TMa81hw0wMdYRaFmYqjDXwy4osnfkXxompIb7Hk48wWGZ/S9+qfUmCInEt
200UEjPjCMPIFn2QSFVmKZ6/HRGIMNBKNEiHvO/TnZ43H9Cfv0k9dRxA90Obf3tF
2ucx4gEGB1cWro3TOJSAoDomqG03cHf+9AphLv6k1P/3XbMKvGJjYfp7LeprCMU=
=BS48
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----