On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 01:10:52PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 09:49:34AM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 5:57 AM Andrew Pinski via Gcc <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > As an aside, I think we should try to clean up MAINTAINERS for folks
> > > who are no longer active and/or don't want to contribute any more.
> > > Especially with old emails listed.
> >
> > There's been issues in the past for people returning and finding themselves
> > removed. We should set to document some policy around this. IMO if
> > listed people are inactive but upon request say they are still curious about
> > changes when CCed it's OK to keep them in.
>
> We now have a process that disables accounts when not used for more
> than a year. It would make sense to have an Emeritus section in
> MAINTAINERS listing those accounts. So they are still listed, but
> there is a hint that they might not be active at the moment. And if
> they wish to become active again it is simple to reactivate their
> account: https://sourceware.org/sourceware/accountinfo.html
> So they can move their entry from Emeritus to Developer again.
Should that be based just on whether the maintainer/reviewer has disabled
accounts?
In theory, a maintainer/reviewer even with no commits within a year might
be active on the mailing list (most importantly in patch review) or in
bugzilla.
If the account is disabled and no mailing list/bugzilla activity (but am not
sure if a year is the right time, if say 3 wouldn't be better), then moving
to Emeritus section looks reasonable.
Jakub
