[SM-Discuss] Clarification before Issue Vote
eric at sandall.us
Wed Jan 23 21:14:03 EST 2008
While (finally) getting to cleaning out the inactive developers, I would
like some clarification of what we think the following paragraph of our
Developer Organization means:
"are automatically nominated and seconded for a removal vote after one year
of inactivity (defined as no committed changes to any part of the project's
source code or documentation repositories)."
In my opinion this should mean they are automatically removed as a general
developer, but as stated we still need to vote on their removal before it
becomes official. Note that this process requires that the developer be
inactive for one *year*. That should be plenty of time for them to let us
know they're too busy and remove them or that they were busy and are about to
make a glorious return. ;)
The Voting Policy states:
"Exception to the above: Automatic Removal Votes (triggered by inactivity as
specified in the Developer Organization document) automatically pass unless a
simple majority (greater than 50% of all binding votes cast) vote against the
So do we still need to do an official vote, but no one is required to vote
since it automatically passes? If anyone votes nay, then everyone required to
vote must vote to meet the quorum for an official vote. Having a vote to
remove someone who hasn't been active (see below) for a year would, in my
opinion, generate more work than I want to do. :)
The same goes for Lead Developers (in their demotion to General Developer
after six months).
Also, "activity" should either be redefined to allow for non-code
contributions (maintaining wiki, spreading the good word, system
maintainence, etc.) or we should have another category to list them in honor,
but not confuse them with our "code monkeys". :)
I would also like to add a note stating that extenuating circumstances (e.g.
e.g. hospitalization, military service, political service) reported to their
respective Component Lead *before* their time is up may mitigate the
automatic nomination/second (and removal if that's added).
A third note I would like to add is what do we do with the developer's
accounts once they are removed (or they leave)? Disable? Delete? Leave alone?
The first and last I like in case they decide to come back (e.g. on hiatus,
but planning on returning), but I would prefer the same steps for all
removals and would prefer deletion (it's easy to re-add an account).
I recall (perhaps incorrectly) that any changes to policies require an Issue
Vote, but I cannot find that written down anywhere at the moment. ;) To be
safe I will call for an Issue Vote after I have received feedback on this for
about a week (roughly) and if that feedback does not point me out to be an
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric at sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | http://counter.li.org/ #196285
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/sm-discuss/attachments/20080123/7ce1e288/attachment.bin
More information about the SM-Discuss