Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Auto-pruning inactive committers?

["Daniel Megert" <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Mickael

I like the idea
to inform projects, but am against what you wrote in the subject ;-)

Dani



From:
       Mickael
Istria <mistria@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
       "eclipse.org-architecture-council"
<eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
       12.05.2020
23:12
Subject:
       [EXTERNAL]
[eclipse.org-architecture-council] Auto-pruning inactive committers?
Sent
by:        eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Hi all,

I see several projects (actually many
projects) with a long list of committers, but if we look at history, a
big part of the committers have not participated in code or mailing-list
for more than a year.
Ideally, the project team should clear
the list, but it can be seen as an "irrespectful" move to remove
inactive committers that some leads would prefer avoiding by politeness
or shiness, and it's also a burden for project leads to take care of these
tasks.
However, an erroneous list of committers
can be perceived as an issue in governance: it gives some false impressions
on the state of the project community and doesn't really conform to meritocracy
(merit is a state, not a 1 time achievement).
So I suggest that the project teams get
some assistance/reminders/hints to better manage their inactive committers,
for example some bot regularly suggesting them to remove the inactive committers,
ideally by listing the committers who haven't had activity for a long enough
time.

What do you think?

-- 
Mickael Istria
Eclipse
IDE developer, for Red
Hat Developers_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council