Anton Gladky <[email protected]> writes: > Hello, > > thanks for raising this! > > I support this proposal but would suggest not to post a list of names on the > public mailing list, as some people may not feel comfortable > being publicly listed as inactive.
+1 because it implausible that most inactive members are following team messages. Thus, this action has two effects: 1. Providing a public record that an inactive member was contacted. 2. What may feel like shame culture. > Maybe we could contact them directly (for example with an > automated email) and set an access expiration date via the gitlab > API. > Given that our social contract requires us to act in and assume good faith, it seems to be that a public announcement that a list exists and that members have been contacted will be sufficient. Anton, do you know if Gitlab would notify members of pending operations like this? Cheers, Nicholas
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
