On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 3/16/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Previously I'd suggested that we should be cleaning up inactive committers
and inactive PMC members - because I'm a bit of a tidy-addict sometimes
and I enjoy deleting :)
A thread on [EMAIL PROTECTED] convinced me that this was half wrong though
- we shouldn't be worrying about cleaning up the large list of inactive
committers, they might come back and that would be great.
However I do still think we should be cleaning up the inactive PMC
members. The PMC represents the active committers entrusted with oversight
- so to have inactive committers on there is a detriment to its ability to
get the job done.
I think I know what you mean, but if I'm right, you didn't say what you
mean. ;-)
The PMC represents those people entrusted with oversight of the project. The
manner in which we elect PMC members means that those people are committers.
A PMC member may be active or inactive with respect to committership, and
may be active or inactive with respect to oversight of the project. Those
two are not necessarily tied at any given time. For example, someone might
be actively working to ensure oversight of the project, but may not have
committed anything for a long time.
All that is a long-winded way of saying that it's not "inactive committers"
that are the concern, but rather inactive overseers. Those people are harder
to identify. Your SVN file proposal might help, although it's not a complete
solution. (I'm not sure that there is one, though.)
Yeah, what you said. :) Sorry for any confusion.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
