Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 10:43:15 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Dne 21.8.2015 v 00:58 Orion Poplawski napsal(a): My gut reaction to this is, my god, we don't need *more* packages in Fedora, we need more people maintaining the pile we already have. So I'd like to see more packagers added as co-maintainers of packages. Hmm, so does it means that becoming a co-maintainer should be preferred way now to become sponsored? Why does it need to be the preferred way? It's one out of multiple ways that's been working fine for Red Hat employees too, isn't it? Do we know anything at all about any new contributors, who have tried to become a co-maintainer of a package and have been rejected? Are there any problems, such as current owners fearing they lose control over a package? Or maintainers, who think a team would be more of a hindrance than a benefit? I guess there are enough packages in the collection, which are used by more people than the single packager. And there are some packagers, who own more packages they can handle. The next time you submit an update request (or a patch) in bugzilla, it's the perfect opportunity to look into becoming a co-maintainer. Or you may want to take care of F21 only? That is possible in pkgdb. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 10:54:58 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Your script output does not tell anything at all about activity of all packagers in the package collection, in the normal review queue(s), in pkgdb. No clues about number of orphaned/retired packages. No clues about semi-dead packages where the packager is absent for a long time, and the package only gets rebuilt during mass-rebuilds or receives random rebuilds by other people. This is completely different sets of problems. It was you who mentioned: [1] https://eischmann.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/growth-of-fedora-repository-has-almost-stalled/ | Growth of Fedora Repository Has Almost Stalled | [...] the increase of number of packages in the official Fedora | repository has almost stalled: Is that blog post meant to be understood differently than I do? Is growth of the repository only linked to packagersponsors' activity? I don't think so. You cannot reduce the problem to only the needsponsor process. Lack of growth is due to various factors. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
2015-08-21 0:58 GMT+02:00 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com: On 08/20/2015 02:50 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors how hard is to get sponsored; reports how Fedora Repository stalled [1]; discussion that we actually do not know how many active sponsors we have. ... [1] https://eischmann.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/growth-of-fedora-repository-has-almost-stalled/ My gut reaction to this is, my god, we don't need *more* packages in Fedora, we need more people maintaining the pile we already have. So I'd like to see more packagers added as co-maintainers of packages. I agree on the part that we should encourage comaintainership. But I'm still skeptical on the comaintainership process which is much less transparent than the classic one. I prefer limiting this to upstream maintainers (which I assume care about tending to their packages) or someone that will be closely supervised by an experienced packager. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.nwra.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
- Original Message - From: Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com To: Development discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Friday, 21 August, 2015 1:58:35 AM Subject: Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets On 08/20/2015 02:50 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors how hard is to get sponsored; reports how Fedora Repository stalled [1]; discussion that we actually do not know how many active sponsors we have. ... [1] https://eischmann.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/growth-of-fedora-repository-has-almost-stalled/ My gut reaction to this is, my god, we don't need *more* packages in Fedora, we need more people maintaining the pile we already have. So I'd like to see more packagers added as co-maintainers of packages. + 1 000 000 000 Alexander Kurtakov Red Hat Eclipse team -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.nwra.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Dne 20.8.2015 v 13:42 Michael Schwendt napsal(a): Your script output does not tell anything at all about activity of all packagers in the package collection, in the normal review queue(s), in pkgdb. No clues about number of orphaned/retired packages. No clues about semi-dead packages where the packager is absent for a long time, and the package only gets rebuilt during mass-rebuilds or receives random rebuilds by other people. This is completely different sets of problems. How many new packagers manage to include a single package in the collection, but lose interest in maintainership afterwards? How many fellow packagers lose interest in Fedora in general and switch to another distribution? Again. Completely different sets of problems. I am trying to focus on How to find sponsor for new contributor in reasonable time. More interesting would be a discussion about which various fields of interest the current sponsors cover. Ruby? MinGW? OLPC XS? Mono? Fonts? Scientific/Maths related school/research projects software? To mention a few fields only. This is actually good idea. -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Am 21.08.2015 um 08:41 schrieb Aleksandar Kurtakov: - Original Message - From: Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com To: Development discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Friday, 21 August, 2015 1:58:35 AM Subject: Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets On 08/20/2015 02:50 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors how hard is to get sponsored; reports how Fedora Repository stalled [1]; discussion that we actually do not know how many active sponsors we have. ... [1] https://eischmann.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/growth-of-fedora-repository-has-almost-stalled/ My gut reaction to this is, my god, we don't need *more* packages in Fedora, we need more people maintaining the pile we already have. So I'd like to see more packagers added as co-maintainers of packages. + 1 000 000 000 agreed - quality and maintainance matters, not having the largest repo with orphaned packages - there is no gain in get 10 new packages for F24 and get the orphaned and so tagged for removal notification a year later signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Dne 21.8.2015 v 00:58 Orion Poplawski napsal(a): My gut reaction to this is, my god, we don't need *more* packages in Fedora, we need more people maintaining the pile we already have. So I'd like to see more packagers added as co-maintainers of packages. Hmm, so does it means that becoming a co-maintainer should be preferred way now to become sponsored? -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 09:14:34AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: I don't know if this has changed in he new age of having crazy human coding machines, but the last time i looked it was extremely difficult to see someone's sponsor and to generate statistics on sponsorship activities. I had some tooling a very long time ago which was used to stir up a whole pile of flames surrounding the handling of inactive sponsors. Although I think too, that right way is to sponsor somebody via Package Review, I enhanced my script to show direct sponsorship - which means that this information is available in FAS :) Mind that this information is not (yet?) linked to that BZ reviews, so I show BZ reviews *and* independently sponsorship in FAS. Without information if this was result of some Package Review. There is this process to become a co-maintainer. I think this is quite useful: The way this is intended (IMHO), is, to get an upstream developer becoming a package maintainer for the specific component. That person at first might not be the best person to maintain an rpm package. But this person knows the software quite well. -- Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Dne 20.8.2015 v 08:57 Ralf Corsepius napsal(a): 5. You cannot push around sponsors. The ability to sponsor packagers is a privilege and not a duty. It's not going to fly to make a volunteer privilege a burdon. I repeated several times in this thread that it is perfectly fine when there is no activity beside your name. I know that there is activity that cannot be measured. That said, I considering your ongoing campaign to be harmful to Fedora. I'm really sad to hear this. I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors how hard is to get sponsored; reports how Fedora Repository stalled [1]; discussion that we actually do not know how many active sponsors we have. So I wanted to do something about it. So I start with this metric in the hope that it may show us where are the space for improvement. However since I got only negative feedback, I'm probably really doing something bad. Therefore I back off from this activity and will do something else. [1] https://eischmann.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/growth-of-fedora-repository-has-almost-stalled/ -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On 08/18/2015 12:04 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: BTW this report reveals that we have just 39 active sponsors (during past year). If you are sponsors, please consider sponsoring somebody from the queue: http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html You should understand that sponsoring someone in reality is a tedious and challenging task. Why? 1. You need to find a package submission your feel sufficiently motivated to review. The packages, I am interested already in are in Fedora, which means I am having difficulties to find any more 2. You need to find a package you technically feel qualified to get involved to. Most recent submissions were out of my technical domains. 3. You need to find a non occupied package. Provided we have sponsors; whom I perceive as keen on collecting badges, this has become an ugly rat-race. 4. Reviews take time, esp. on those with NEEDSPONSORS. In recent times, I perceived a lot of low quality submissions, I am not interested in wasting my time on, any more. 5. You cannot push around sponsors. The ability to sponsor packagers is a privilege and not a duty. It's not going to fly to make a volunteer privilege a burdon. That said, I considering your ongoing campaign to be harmful to Fedora. All you are going to achieve is to collect more hyperactive kids and to drive away more of the old and experienced hares. Ralf -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 10:50 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: That said, I considering your ongoing campaign to be harmful to Fedora. I'm really sad to hear this. I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors how hard is to get sponsored; reports how Fedora Repository stalled [1]; discussion that we actually do not know how many active sponsors we have. So I wanted to do something about it. So I start with this metric in the hope that it may show us where are the space for improvement. However since I got only negative feedback, I'm probably really doing something bad. Therefore I back off from this activity and will do something else. The metric itself is very useful information for Fedora leadership to know what are the available resources at a given time, and how these evolves over time. It could also, be used as an indicator for sponsors to remove, but I don't see much value in that - with volunteers you can have very long gaps in their active contribution level. Having the trends however shown by such a tool, will allow for decisions which are backed by data. For example if the number of active sponsors decreases we are doing something wrong. If irrespective of the active sponsors number trend, requests continue to accumulate then some action needs to be taken. So I'd say go for it. Even if such data are not used now, the statistics it will generate over time would certainly help future decisions for Fedora. regards, Nikos -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 10:50:55 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors how hard is to get sponsored; Yes, it's incredibly easy for Red Hat employees to get sponsored via the Become a co-maintainer process: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Become_a_co-maintainer No need to contribute any reviews. No need to submit any package for review. Fast sponsorship. And yes, the same process _would_ work for all community contributors, too, but not if people don't want to become a co-maintainer for anything. reports how Fedora Repository stalled [1]; [1] https://eischmann.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/growth-of-fedora-repository-has-almost-stalled/ Your script output does not tell anything at all about activity of all packagers in the package collection, in the normal review queue(s), in pkgdb. No clues about number of orphaned/retired packages. No clues about semi-dead packages where the packager is absent for a long time, and the package only gets rebuilt during mass-rebuilds or receives random rebuilds by other people. How many new packagers manage to include a single package in the collection, but lose interest in maintainership afterwards? How many fellow packagers lose interest in Fedora in general and switch to another distribution? discussion that we actually do not know how many active sponsors we have. More interesting would be a discussion about which various fields of interest the current sponsors cover. Ruby? MinGW? OLPC XS? Mono? Fonts? Scientific/Maths related school/research projects software? To mention a few fields only. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On 08/20/2015 02:50 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors how hard is to get sponsored; reports how Fedora Repository stalled [1]; discussion that we actually do not know how many active sponsors we have. ... [1] https://eischmann.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/growth-of-fedora-repository-has-almost-stalled/ My gut reaction to this is, my god, we don't need *more* packages in Fedora, we need more people maintaining the pile we already have. So I'd like to see more packagers added as co-maintainers of packages. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.nwra.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
2015-08-15 9:13 GMT+02:00 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com: Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those sponsors who does not make his duty. Here comes this script: https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The current logic is: 1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors 2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package Review component which are assigned to this sponsor 3. give the sponsor some credit when he changed bug status (to whatever state) as this indicate some work on this bug 4. give the sponsor some credit if he remove FE-NEEDSPONSOR from blocking bugs as this indicate finishing sponsor work This does not reflect if you sponsor somebody directly. Hi Miroslav, this is not the only problem with your script. I think the underlying definition of sponsoring work is flawed. A sponsor not only sponsors new contributors into the packager group but acts as guide ever after. Even though I have not accepted any new candidates throughout the last year, I still look after all of my 24 protégés. I not only answer questions when they occur, I also look at every commit, build and update. This of course, takes some time and thus limits the number of packagers a sponsor can take care of. While I see the need for sponsoring new contributors in a timely manner, I always found the focus on sponsoring as many as possible questionable. And I'm afraid your script can encourage this behavior, no matter if the output says no sponsor work or recent sponsor activity. I think the least you should do is change the wording to has not accepted any new candidates or alike, but you will never be able to know who did actual sponsor work. Best regards, Christoph -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Miroslav Suchý wrote: Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those sponsors who does not make his duty. Here comes this script: https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors So you think public shaming is the way to bully people into sponsoring more packagers? SARCASMThat's sure going to increase the quality of sponsorship!/SARCASM I can easily hit the sponsor button on 10 random people a week to make your metrics happy, without any kind of package review or mentoring. But I don't think that is going to help the project at all, so I DON'T want to do that! Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On 08/19/2015 02:05 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: 2015-08-15 9:13 GMT+02:00 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com: Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those sponsors who does not make his duty. Here comes this script: https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The current logic is: 1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors 2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package Review component which are assigned to this sponsor 3. give the sponsor some credit when he changed bug status (to whatever state) as this indicate some work on this bug 4. give the sponsor some credit if he remove FE-NEEDSPONSOR from blocking bugs as this indicate finishing sponsor work This does not reflect if you sponsor somebody directly. Hi Miroslav, this is not the only problem with your script. I think the underlying definition of sponsoring work is flawed. A sponsor not only sponsors new contributors into the packager group but acts as guide ever after. Even though I have not accepted any new candidates throughout the last year, I still look after all of my 24 protégés. I not only answer questions when they occur, I also look at every commit, build and update. This of course, takes some time and thus limits the number of packagers a sponsor can take care of. While I see the need for sponsoring new contributors in a timely manner, I always found the focus on sponsoring as many as possible questionable. And I'm afraid your script can encourage this behavior, no matter if the output says no sponsor work or recent sponsor activity. I think the least you should do is change the wording to has not accepted any new candidates or alike, but you will never be able to know who did actual sponsor work. Best regards, Christoph I was about to send just the same thing. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA/CoRA DivisionFAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@cora.nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Dne 17.8.2015 v 18:30 Michael Schwendt napsal(a): Have you followed the How To Get Sponsored guidelines? ... So what? I'm tired by such an attitude and by all complainers, who sit and wait instead of showing a bit of activity and following the guidelines. Your attitude just discouraged [1] one Fedora contributor. sarcasmCongratulations/sarcasm [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249270#c7 -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
This is current output from my script with updates based on your comments: Aurelien Bompard abompard - no recent sponsor activity Adrien Devresse adev - no recent sponsor activity Adrian Reber adrian - no recent sponsor activity Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1190728 Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1226926 Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov - directly sponsored: [u'zzambers', u'jwakely', u'sopotc'] Alexander Larsson alexl - no recent sponsor activity Axel Thimm athimm - no recent sponsor activity Dennis Gilmore ausil - directly sponsored: [u'jperrin'] Andrea Veri averi - no recent sponsor activity Andreas Bierfert awjb - no recent sponsor activity Björn besser82 Esser besser82 removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1129677 Björn besser82 Esser besser82 - directly sponsored: [u'romanofski'] Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkabrda - no recent sponsor activity Christian Iseli c4chris - no recent sponsor activity Christopher Aillon (sabbatical, not receiving bugmail) caillon - no recent sponsor activity Chitlesh GOORAH chitlesh - no recent sponsor activity Ricky Elrod codeblock - no recent sponsor activity Ralf Corsepius corsepiu - no recent sponsor activity Cole Robinson crobinso - no recent sponsor activity Chris Weyl cweyl - no recent sponsor activity Christoph Wickert cwickert - no recent sponsor activity Denis Leroy denis - no recent sponsor activity Dave Malcolm dmalcolm - no recent sponsor activity Douglas Schilling Landgraf dougsland removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1191498 David Woodhouse dwmw2 - no recent sponsor activity Eduardo Echeverria echevemaster removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1141494 Eduardo Echeverria echevemaster - directly sponsored: [u'williamjmorenor', u'robyduck', u'tonet666p'] Enrico Scholz ensc - no recent sponsor activity Thomas Fitzsimmons fitzsim - no recent sponsor activity Gérard Milmeister gemi - no recent sponsor activity Marek Goldmann goldmann removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1213111 Marek Goldmann goldmann - directly sponsored: [u'error', u'karm'] Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1090933 Haïkel Guémar hguemar worked on BZ 1150504 Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1196366 Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1219540 Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1231943 Haïkel Guémar hguemar worked on BZ 1241632 Haïkel Guémar hguemar worked on BZ 1241812 Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1242011 Haïkel Guémar hguemar worked on BZ 1243048 Haïkel Guémar hguemar - directly sponsored: [u'divius', u'anvil', u'gdubreui', u'gabbayo', u'vkmc', u'coolsvap', u'flepied', u'bcotton', u'trown', u'bdemers', u'jpena', u'alphacc'] Richard Shaw hobbes1069 - no recent sponsor activity Ian Weller ianweller - no recent sponsor activity Iain Arnell iarnell - no recent sponsor activity Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams ivazquez - no recent sponsor activity Andreas Thienemann ixs - no recent sponsor activity José Matos jamatos worked on BZ 1126100 Jerry James jjames - no recent sponsor activity Jesse Keating jkeating - no recent sponsor activity John (J5) Palmieri johnp - no recent sponsor activity Jose Pedro Oliveira jpo - no recent sponsor activity Jaroslav Škarvada jskarvad removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1184040 Jaroslav Škarvada jskarvad - directly sponsored: [u'absal0m', u'vtrefny'] Susi Lehtola jussilehtola - no recent sponsor activity Jarod Wilson jwilson - no recent sponsor activity Hans de Goede jwrdegoede - no recent sponsor activity Kalev Lember kalev - directly sponsored: [u'catanzaro', u'mhatina'] Karsten Hopp karsten - no recent sponsor activity Jeremy Katz katzj - no recent sponsor activity David Nalley ke4qqq - no recent sponsor activity Kevin Kofler kkofler - directly sponsored: [u'germano'] Ken Dreyer ktdreyer - directly sponsored: [u'no1youknowz', u'dachary', u'yo61', u'trhoden'] Xavier Lamien laxathom - directly sponsored: [u'tpokorra', u'elsupergomez'] Jon Ciesla limb - no recent sponsor activity Lubomir Rintel lkundrak removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 823679 Lubomir Rintel lkundrak removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1162148 Lubomir Rintel lkundrak removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1196289 Lubomir Rintel lkundrak - directly sponsored: [u'marwin', u'acatton', u'zvetlik', u'jbenc'] Luke Macken lmacken - no recent sponsor activity lut...@watzmann.net lutter - no recent sponsor activity Mario Blättermann mariobl - no recent sponsor activity Mark McLoughlin markmc - no recent sponsor activity Adam Miller maxamillion removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1251238 Mat Booth mbooth - no recent sponsor activity Matthias Clasen mclasen - no recent sponsor activity Matthew Booth mdbooth removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1132971 Matthew Booth mdbooth - directly sponsored: [u'errr'] Matt Domsch mdomsch - no recent sponsor activity Martin Gieseking mgieseki - no recent sponsor activity Michael Scherer misc removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1100870 Michael Scherer misc - directly sponsored: [u'jehane', u'fbo',
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 12:55:37 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Have you followed the How To Get Sponsored guidelines? ... So what? I'm tired by such an attitude and by all complainers, who sit and wait instead of showing a bit of activity and following the guidelines. Your attitude just discouraged [1] one Fedora contributor. sarcasmCongratulations/sarcasm [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249270#c7 Are you here to fight? Have you read the following? https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-August/213489.html In the queue, you've already visited several tickets with no response from the submitter. Eventually, you will learn and realise that your agenda related to this topic is the wrong road. Activity is a key, but it's not only inactive sponsors that are the problem. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
BTW this report reveals that we have just 39 active sponsors (during past year). If you are sponsors, please consider sponsoring somebody from the queue: http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html Good start is to take some bug from top (or bottom) of http://red.ht/1K3njkO (bugs sorted by last change time) There are even some reviews which have no single comment neither from reviewer nor from sponsor. And if you are experienced packager, please do not hesitate to enrol as sponsor: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_sponsor_a_new_contributor#Becoming_a_Fedora_Package_Collection_Sponsor -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On 08/17/2015 07:47 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: David Woodhouse dwmw2 - no recent sponsor activity Reports bugs but not otherwise active in Fedora to my knowledge. He's still around. He actively maintains packages for SIPE support (Microsoft Lync / Skype Business) in Pidgin. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On 17.08.2015 15:18, Josh Boyer wrote: On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 17.8.2015 v 14:47 Josh Boyer napsal(a): I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group. -1 There is nothing wrong on being inactive. At least as long as others are active. If they would want, they can return any time they want. There is a problem though. It makes the sponsors list larger than it actually is, and gives the impression that we have more people available for sponsoring than we actually do. From a new packager perspective, it is even more frustrating to see a larger list and still have no sponsor. Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015. I am active in a few Fedora areas (informal reviews, bugs requests, preparing new features requests, small patch preparation to fedora-review tool, mailing list sent from time to time). My feeling as new person in Fedora devel community is that something does not work here. From my point of view it looks that at least these new persons' activities are not noticed or are ignored. I do not write it for forcing my being sponsored. I am not expecting that and even I would not be sponsored now. I prefer to be sponsored in natural way, not by recalling about me. I am writing about it for share with you my feedback as new person that is trying to be sponsored. At the very least, we need to have a way to mark these people as inactive so they are accurately reflected. I am very curious the output from script that will recognize this situation. Best regards. Marcin Haba signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:50:26 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote: Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015. Waiting for what? There may be a misunderstanding of the How To Get Sponsored Wiki page. I am active in a few Fedora areas (informal reviews, bugs requests, preparing new features requests, small patch preparation to fedora-review tool, mailing list sent from time to time). That sounds like quite some activity which you should mention when contacting a potential sponsor. In your package review requests you have met some potential sponsors already. Please don't expect *every* sponsor to observe *everyone* everywhere within the Fedora Project or even beyond that. Sponsors usually take a look at the queue, and if there is no name they have seen before, or if there is only a single package submitted by somebody, that's not much input. However, a single package review ticket is a great place where to point at reviews you've done, or to give sponsors a hint about any other activity (such as packages in Copr or a private repo). Sponsors cannot know that. My feeling as new person in Fedora devel community is that something does not work here. From my point of view it looks that at least these new persons' activities are not noticed or are ignored. As above. Waiting is the biggest pitfall of the needsponsor review queue. The worst is not responding to reviewer's comments and waiting inactively for months (without even maintaining the submitted packages). The Wiki also suggests doing some things _in advance_ (such as a few reviews, and weeks to months give plenty of time to attempt at doing a few reviews), so if a potential sponsor takes a look at the single package somebody may have added to the queue, there is more input in the ticket than just a single (and possibly flawed/broken) package. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Dne 17.8.2015 v 14:47 Josh Boyer napsal(a): I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group. -1 There is nothing wrong on being inactive. At least as long as others are active. If they would want, they can return any time they want. We should *not* be like turned down lover If you leave me once, you are not welcome any more. And as I said previously, the knowledge you proven to have as sponsor does not disappear. The guidelines does not change too much. You can refresh your knowledge in few hours. -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 17.8.2015 v 14:47 Josh Boyer napsal(a): I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group. -1 There is nothing wrong on being inactive. At least as long as others are active. If they would want, they can return any time they want. There is a problem though. It makes the sponsors list larger than it actually is, and gives the impression that we have more people available for sponsoring than we actually do. From a new packager perspective, it is even more frustrating to see a larger list and still have no sponsor. It also lends itself to those people being contacted directly for sponsorship requests, which will then go ungranted because they are not active sponsors. At the very least, we need to have a way to mark these people as inactive so they are accurately reflected. We should *not* be like turned down lover If you leave me once, you are not welcome any more. I didn't say or suggest that they aren't welcome. I said we should remove them from the sponsors list. Please do not elevate things to hyperbole. And as I said previously, the knowledge you proven to have as sponsor does not disappear. The guidelines does not change too much. You can refresh your knowledge in few hours. Correct. However, if they return it should be as simple and quick to get them granted access again. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
RE: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
I have used my sponsorship permissions in the past to mentor other Dell employees, but have not had need to do so in quite a while. I have downgraded my rights from sponsor to user, and will re-apply for sponsor status should the need arise again in the future. Thanks, Matt -- Matt Domsch Senior Distinguished Engineer Executive Director Dell | Software Group, Office of the CTO -Original Message- From: devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org [mailto:devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Miroslav Suchý Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2015 2:13 AM To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those sponsors who does not make his duty. Here comes this script: https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The current logic is: 1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors 2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package Review component which are assigned to this sponsor 3. give the sponsor some credit when he changed bug status (to whatever state) as this indicate some work on this bug 4. give the sponsor some credit if he remove FE-NEEDSPONSOR from blocking bugs as this indicate finishing sponsor work This does not reflect if you sponsor somebody directly. E.g. because he want to be become co-maintainer and does not submit package review. This time I run it for past year. So this script reveals those who does not sponsor anybody for whole year. I hope that in future I can lower this constant to half year or even 3 months. Ideas, patches and comments about this script are welcome. Dear sponsor, remember that with great power comes great responsibility. You should regularly visit http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html and pick up some review. Only if this queue length is close to zero and people does not need to wait for sponsor, only then we can attract more packagers to Fedora. And here follows the output from my script (sorted by username). Mirek Aurelien Bompard done no sponsor work Adrien Devresse done no sponsor work Adrian Reber done no sponsor work Alexander Kurtakov is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1190728 Alexander Kurtakov is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1226926 Alexander Larsson done no sponsor work Axel Thimm done no sponsor work Dennis Gilmore done no sponsor work Andrea Veri done no sponsor work Andreas Bierfert done no sponsor work Björn besser82 Esser is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1129677 Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda done no sponsor work Christian Iseli done no sponsor work Christopher Aillon (sabbatical, not receiving bugmail) done no sponsor work Chitlesh GOORAH done no sponsor work Ricky Elrod done no sponsor work Ralf Corsepius done no sponsor work Cole Robinson done no sponsor work Chris Weyl done no sponsor work Christoph Wickert done no sponsor work Denis Leroy done no sponsor work Dave Malcolm done no sponsor work Douglas Schilling Landgraf is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1191498 David Woodhouse done no sponsor work Eduardo Echeverria is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1141494 Michał Bentkowski done no sponsor work Enrico Scholz done no sponsor work Thomas Fitzsimmons done no sponsor work Gérard Milmeister done no sponsor work Marek Goldmann is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1213111 Haïkel Guémar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1090933 Haïkel Guémar is a good guy - worked on BZ 1150504 Haïkel Guémar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1196366 Haïkel Guémar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1219540 Haïkel Guémar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1231943 Haïkel Guémar is a good guy - worked on BZ 1241632 Haïkel Guémar is a good guy - worked on BZ 1241812 Haïkel Guémar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1242011 Haïkel Guémar is a good guy - worked on BZ 1243048 Richard Shaw done no sponsor work Ian Weller done no sponsor work Iain Arnell done no sponsor work Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams done no sponsor work Andreas Thienemann done no sponsor work José Matos is a good guy - worked on BZ 1126100 Jerry James done no sponsor work Jesse Keating done no sponsor work John (J5) Palmieri done no sponsor work Jose Pedro Oliveira done no sponsor work Jaroslav Škarvada is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1184040 Jef Spaleta done no sponsor work Susi Lehtola done no sponsor work Jarod Wilson done no sponsor work Hans de Goede done no sponsor work Kalev Lember done no sponsor work Karsten Hopp done no sponsor work Jeremy Katz done no sponsor work David Nalley done no sponsor work Kevin Kofler done no sponsor work Ken Dreyer done no sponsor
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote: This is current output from my script with updates based on your comments: Axel Thimm athimm - no recent sponsor activity Had his packages orphaned a while ago due to non-responsive maintainer. Christopher Aillon (sabbatical, not receiving bugmail) caillon - no recent sponsor activity Has not been active in Fedora for a number of years. David Woodhouse dwmw2 - no recent sponsor activity Reports bugs but not otherwise active in Fedora to my knowledge. Jesse Keating jkeating - no recent sponsor activity John (J5) Palmieri johnp - no recent sponsor activity Neither are active in Fedora any longer. Jeremy Katz katzj - no recent sponsor activity Not active in Fedora for a number of years. Paul Nasrat pnasrat - no recent sponsor activity Not active in Fedora for a number of years. Warren Togami wtogami - no recent sponsor activity Not active in Fedora for a number of years. I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 17.8.2015 v 14:47 Josh Boyer napsal(a): I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group. -1 There is nothing wrong on being inactive. At least as long as others are active. If they would want, they can return any time they want. There is a problem though. It makes the sponsors list larger than it actually is, and gives the impression that we have more people available for sponsoring than we actually do. From a new packager perspective, it is even more frustrating to see a larger list and still have no sponsor. It also lends itself to those people being contacted directly for sponsorship requests, which will then go ungranted because they are not active sponsors. At the very least, we need to have a way to mark these people as inactive so they are accurately reflected. We should *not* be like turned down lover If you leave me once, you are not welcome any more. I didn't say or suggest that they aren't welcome. I said we should remove them from the sponsors list. Please do not elevate things to hyperbole. And as I said previously, the knowledge you proven to have as sponsor does not disappear. The guidelines does not change too much. You can refresh your knowledge in few hours. Correct. However, if they return it should be as simple and quick to get them granted access again. +1 to what Josh said above. Regards, Parag. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
This is current output from my script with updates based on your comments: Aurelien Bompard abompard - no recent sponsor activity Adrien Devresse adev - no recent sponsor activity Adrian Reber adrian - no recent sponsor activity Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1190728 Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1226926 Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov - directly sponsored: [u'zzambers', u'jwakely', u'sopotc'] Alexander Larsson alexl - no recent sponsor activity Axel Thimm athimm - no recent sponsor activity Dennis Gilmore ausil - directly sponsored: [u'jperrin'] Andrea Veri averi - no recent sponsor activity Andreas Bierfert awjb - no recent sponsor activity Björn besser82 Esser besser82 removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1129677 Björn besser82 Esser besser82 - directly sponsored: [u'romanofski'] Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkabrda - no recent sponsor activity Christian Iseli c4chris - no recent sponsor activity Christopher Aillon (sabbatical, not receiving bugmail) caillon - no recent sponsor activity Chitlesh GOORAH chitlesh - no recent sponsor activity Ricky Elrod codeblock - no recent sponsor activity Ralf Corsepius corsepiu - no recent sponsor activity Cole Robinson crobinso - no recent sponsor activity Chris Weyl cweyl - no recent sponsor activity Christoph Wickert cwickert - no recent sponsor activity Denis Leroy denis - no recent sponsor activity Dave Malcolm dmalcolm - no recent sponsor activity Douglas Schilling Landgraf dougsland removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1191498 David Woodhouse dwmw2 - no recent sponsor activity Eduardo Echeverria echevemaster removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1141494 Eduardo Echeverria echevemaster - directly sponsored: [u'williamjmorenor', u'robyduck', u'tonet666p'] Enrico Scholz ensc - no recent sponsor activity Thomas Fitzsimmons fitzsim - no recent sponsor activity Gérard Milmeister gemi - no recent sponsor activity Marek Goldmann goldmann removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1213111 Marek Goldmann goldmann - directly sponsored: [u'error', u'karm'] Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1090933 Haïkel Guémar hguemar worked on BZ 1150504 Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1196366 Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1219540 Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1231943 Haïkel Guémar hguemar worked on BZ 1241632 Haïkel Guémar hguemar worked on BZ 1241812 Haïkel Guémar hguemar removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1242011 Haïkel Guémar hguemar worked on BZ 1243048 Haïkel Guémar hguemar - directly sponsored: [u'divius', u'anvil', u'gdubreui', u'gabbayo', u'vkmc', u'coolsvap', u'flepied', u'bcotton', u'trown', u'bdemers', u'jpena', u'alphacc'] Richard Shaw hobbes1069 - no recent sponsor activity Ian Weller ianweller - no recent sponsor activity Iain Arnell iarnell - no recent sponsor activity Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams ivazquez - no recent sponsor activity Andreas Thienemann ixs - no recent sponsor activity José Matos jamatos worked on BZ 1126100 Jerry James jjames - no recent sponsor activity Jesse Keating jkeating - no recent sponsor activity John (J5) Palmieri johnp - no recent sponsor activity Jose Pedro Oliveira jpo - no recent sponsor activity Jaroslav Škarvada jskarvad removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1184040 Jaroslav Škarvada jskarvad - directly sponsored: [u'absal0m', u'vtrefny'] Susi Lehtola jussilehtola - no recent sponsor activity Jarod Wilson jwilson - no recent sponsor activity Hans de Goede jwrdegoede - no recent sponsor activity Kalev Lember kalev - directly sponsored: [u'catanzaro', u'mhatina'] Karsten Hopp karsten - no recent sponsor activity Jeremy Katz katzj - no recent sponsor activity David Nalley ke4qqq - no recent sponsor activity Kevin Kofler kkofler - directly sponsored: [u'germano'] Ken Dreyer ktdreyer - directly sponsored: [u'no1youknowz', u'dachary', u'yo61', u'trhoden'] Xavier Lamien laxathom - directly sponsored: [u'tpokorra', u'elsupergomez'] Jon Ciesla limb - no recent sponsor activity Lubomir Rintel lkundrak removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 823679 Lubomir Rintel lkundrak removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1162148 Lubomir Rintel lkundrak removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1196289 Lubomir Rintel lkundrak - directly sponsored: [u'marwin', u'acatton', u'zvetlik', u'jbenc'] Luke Macken lmacken - no recent sponsor activity lut...@watzmann.net lutter - no recent sponsor activity Mario Blättermann mariobl - no recent sponsor activity Mark McLoughlin markmc - no recent sponsor activity Adam Miller maxamillion removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1251238 Mat Booth mbooth - no recent sponsor activity Matthias Clasen mclasen - no recent sponsor activity Matthew Booth mdbooth removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1132971 Matthew Booth mdbooth - directly sponsored: [u'errr'] Matt Domsch mdomsch - no recent sponsor activity Martin Gieseking mgieseki - no recent sponsor activity Michael Scherer misc removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1100870 Michael Scherer misc - directly sponsored: [u'jehane', u'fbo',
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:55:46 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015. Waiting for what? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203018 You've misunderstood the question. Hence that link isn't an answer. Do you want me to link tickets where I'm waiting for a response from a package submitter for over two years? Or even a longer time? No, you don't. The problem is not only inactive sponsors or too few sponsors. It is also to be found on the other side of the fence. New contributors, who are inactive or who are not willing to perform some basic tasks other than dumping a package into the review queue. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 19:01:24 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: maybe you should have read the link below becaus ethen maybe you would not accuse him about his attitude - there is a lot of activity and fast respones - what else should he do? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203018 Well, how about working with the sponsor that added comment 19 in that ticket? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Am 17.08.2015 um 18:30 schrieb Michael Schwendt: On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 17:07:07 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote: There may be a misunderstanding of the How To Get Sponsored Wiki page. If everything works fine with sponsoring, so why does this subject exist? It is not first thread here about sponsoring. So what? I'm tired by such an attitude and by all complainers, who sit and wait instead of showing a bit of activity and following the guidelines maybe you should have read the link below becaus ethen maybe you would not accuse him about his attitude - there is a lot of activity and fast respones - what else should he do? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203018 You've misunderstood the question. Hence that link isn't an answer. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 17:07:07 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote: Hello, On 17.08.2015 16:33, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:50:26 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote: Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015. Waiting for what? For sponsoring me by somebody. Have you followed the How To Get Sponsored guidelines? Please read context. And this thread title either ;-) Why the smiley? With all due respect, I could write a book about some of the things that happen at the Fedora School ... eh, the Fedora Project. I'm an active reviewer for a long time. Some of my point of view is based on bad experience I've made or have witnessed. Pointing the finger at the sponsors is narrow-minded. There may be a misunderstanding of the How To Get Sponsored Wiki page. If everything works fine with sponsoring, so why does this subject exist? It is not first thread here about sponsoring. So what? I'm tired by such an attitude and by all complainers, who sit and wait instead of showing a bit of activity and following the guidelines. Yes, I have met a potential sponsor. But it did not cause that I started to be sponsored. That's why it may take more time to _convince_ a potential sponsor. Doing reviews *and* telling the potential sponsors about those reviews could be one way to speed up the process. It is not my intention to ask every sponsor about sponsoring me. For this purpose is used FE-NEEDSPONSOR ticket and I am there already. Waiting for what? Please don't expect *every* sponsor to observe *everyone* everywhere within the Fedora Project or even beyond that. I do not expect every sponsor to observe every everywhere. But sponsors that are not only two or three persons ;-) And still it must be a sponsor, who is capable enough to comment on your package(s) as a _reviewer_. I do not have only single package ticket. Until earlier today, you've had only a single one in the needsponsor queue. The other one was missing the FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. And that tells another tale, too. All unassigned review requests are visible in the normal review queue. Everyone can contribute reviews there or leave other comments. Where is the community's interest in these packages? Where are the package users? Where are the co-maintainers? What about all the existing packagers? Is there nobody with interest in the packages? No interest, no reviews, no users? Highly problematic are packages with a questionable target group, such as targeting a niche market. If after months there still is nobody else to contribute a review, who else uses the package or has interest it it? There have been packages for APIs with no dependencies for many months. Not even the original package submitter found and made a package for a dependency. IMO, it makes no sense to flood a package collection with such packages. As above. Waiting is the biggest pitfall of the needsponsor review queue. The worst is not responding to reviewer's comments and waiting inactively for months (without even maintaining the submitted packages). Please show me ticket where I did not response in reasonable time? You misunderstand it. I refer to the How To Get Sponsored guidelines. Not every sponsor is confident enough to approve a new contributor based on a single package only. Some sponsors _explicitly_ ask new contributors to do a few reviews. They _require_ them to do that before sponsorship. Some contributors are willing to do reviews. Others are not. Some of those, who are not willing, may need to wait a much longer time before finding a sponsor. I don't make this all up. In which place packages added by my are broken? This topic/subject is not only about _your_ package review requests. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Dne 17.8.2015 v 16:33 Michael Schwendt napsal(a): Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015. Waiting for what? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203018 -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Hello, On 17.08.2015 16:33, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:50:26 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote: Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015. Waiting for what? For sponsoring me by somebody. Please read context. And this thread title either ;-) There may be a misunderstanding of the How To Get Sponsored Wiki page. If everything works fine with sponsoring, so why does this subject exist? It is not first thread here about sponsoring. I am active in a few Fedora areas (informal reviews, bugs requests, preparing new features requests, small patch preparation to fedora-review tool, mailing list sent from time to time). That sounds like quite some activity which you should mention when contacting a potential sponsor. In your package review requests you have met some potential sponsors already. Yes, I have met a potential sponsor. But it did not cause that I started to be sponsored. It is not my intention to ask every sponsor about sponsoring me. For this purpose is used FE-NEEDSPONSOR ticket and I am there already. Please don't expect *every* sponsor to observe *everyone* everywhere within the Fedora Project or even beyond that. I do not expect every sponsor to observe every everywhere. But sponsors that are not only two or three persons ;-) Sponsors usually take a look at the queue, and if there is no name they have seen before, or if there is only a single package submitted by somebody, that's not much input. However, a single package review ticket is a great place where to point at reviews you've done, or to give sponsors a hint about any other activity (such as packages in Copr or a private repo). Sponsors cannot know that. I do not have only single package ticket. And in near feature I am going to provide more packages to review. It is also required for unbundle one my big package that I am trying to contribute Fedora. My feeling as new person in Fedora devel community is that something does not work here. From my point of view it looks that at least these new persons' activities are not noticed or are ignored. As above. Waiting is the biggest pitfall of the needsponsor review queue. The worst is not responding to reviewer's comments and waiting inactively for months (without even maintaining the submitted packages). Please show me ticket where I did not response in reasonable time? In ticket for, which I am doing informal reviews, that I remind people that ticket does not move forward. The Wiki also suggests doing some things _in advance_ (such as a few reviews, and weeks to months give plenty of time to attempt at doing a few reviews), so if a potential sponsor takes a look at the single package somebody may have added to the queue, there is more input in the ticket than just a single (and possibly flawed/broken) package. In which place packages added by my are broken? I am not going to continue this discussion because as I wrote in previous mail, it was only feedback from my side. It is not my intention to gain something by this feedback. It is just feedback to potential consideration if it is useful. Thanks. Best regards. Marcin Haba signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On 17.08.2015 17:40, Pete Travis wrote: On Aug 17, 2015 10:07 AM, Marcin Haba marcin.h...@bacula.pl wrote: Hello, *snip* I am not going to continue this discussion because as I wrote in previous mail, it was only feedback from my side. It is not my intention to gain something by this feedback. It is just feedback to potential consideration if it is useful. Thanks. Best regards. Marcin Haba This is the misunderstanding. Your feedback is welcome and helpful, that's how the Fedora community operates. Someone might debate with you, but that is how ideas change and grow. If you are sharing your experience, and sharing your progress, you *should* expect to gain something from it. The theme of the thread is about improving that experience for you, the prospective packager. I encourage you to start a new, public thread detailing your progress and goals. Hello Pete, You are right. The thread is targeted on sponsors, not sponsored. I read a sentence which touched my current feeling and I really wanted to comment it. And this way I jumped here in this thread. Sorry, if I broke this discussion and thanks for your advises. (And I apologize if you've already done that. Part of the problem is that activity on both sides is not easily discoverable, so you might have to help sponsors discover your efforts. That's not begging for special attention, only participating in the process.) I am not sure if I try this. Nevertheless thanks for this tip. Best regards. Marcin Haba signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Aug 17, 2015 10:07 AM, Marcin Haba marcin.h...@bacula.pl wrote: Hello, *snip* I am not going to continue this discussion because as I wrote in previous mail, it was only feedback from my side. It is not my intention to gain something by this feedback. It is just feedback to potential consideration if it is useful. Thanks. Best regards. Marcin Haba This is the misunderstanding. Your feedback is welcome and helpful, that's how the Fedora community operates. Someone might debate with you, but that is how ideas change and grow. If you are sharing your experience, and sharing your progress, you *should* expect to gain something from it. The theme of the thread is about improving that experience for you, the prospective packager. I encourage you to start a new, public thread detailing your progress and goals. (And I apologize if you've already done that. Part of the problem is that activity on both sides is not easily discoverable, so you might have to help sponsors discover your efforts. That's not begging for special attention, only participating in the process.) --Pete -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Le 17 août 2015 8:47 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org a écrit : On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote: This is current output from my script with updates based on your comments: Axel Thimm athimm - no recent sponsor activity Had his packages orphaned a while ago due to non-responsive maintainer. Christopher Aillon (sabbatical, not receiving bugmail) caillon - no recent sponsor activity Has not been active in Fedora for a number of years. David Woodhouse dwmw2 - no recent sponsor activity Reports bugs but not otherwise active in Fedora to my knowledge. Jesse Keating jkeating - no recent sponsor activity John (J5) Palmieri johnp - no recent sponsor activity Neither are active in Fedora any longer. Jeremy Katz katzj - no recent sponsor activity Not active in Fedora for a number of years. Paul Nasrat pnasrat - no recent sponsor activity Not active in Fedora for a number of years. Warren Togami wtogami - no recent sponsor activity Not active in Fedora for a number of years. Warren is still active in EPEL, at least he helped me fixing some packages there, recently. I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Dne 15.8.2015 v 16:43 Till Maas napsal(a): I think the script should also consider comments to needsponsor bugs as sponsoring work, even if the bug was not yet assigned to someone. Good idea, I will think about how to fetch this info. And IMHO the wording should be a little bit more friendly, e.g. no recent sponsor activity instead of no sponsor work. *nod* This was very first version and I did not think about the wording too much. I altered it. -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Dne 15.8.2015 v 20:09 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a): H Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people H abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager H group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source H would just hide this hideous behaviour. I don't know if this has changed in he new age of having crazy human coding machines, but the last time i looked it was extremely difficult to see someone's sponsor and to generate statistics on sponsorship activities. I had some tooling a very long time ago which was used to stir up a whole pile of flames surrounding the handling of inactive sponsors. Although I think too, that right way is to sponsor somebody via Package Review, I enhanced my script to show direct sponsorship - which means that this information is available in FAS :) Mind that this information is not (yet?) linked to that BZ reviews, so I show BZ reviews *and* independently sponsorship in FAS. Without information if this was result of some Package Review. -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Dne 15.8.2015 v 11:21 Christopher Meng napsal(a): And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out? NO! There is really no pros if we revoke some sponsors. We just need them more active. And we need more sponsors. (BTW if you are not yet sponsor and you want to become one, just follow: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_sponsor_a_new_contributor#Becoming_a_Fedora_Package_Collection_Sponsor ) My motivation for this script were already described here: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-July/212527.html And I will repeat: The purpose is *not* to revoke someone sponsorship role. Neither to put a shame on somebody. It is perfectly fine if you pause your Fedora activity. It is *volunteer* work. On the other hand sometimes we (as Fedora) have the right to send signals Hey, we are here! Do you remember us?!. My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no longer work in Fedora Project, leaving the privilege to them is useless: *nod*, I enhanced the script to skip those sponsors who are marked as inactive in FAS. -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Monday, 17 August 2015 at 19:39, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 19:01:24 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: maybe you should have read the link below becaus ethen maybe you would not accuse him about his attitude - there is a lot of activity and fast respones - what else should he do? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203018 Well, how about working with the sponsor that added comment 19 in that ticket? I am that sponsor. One of the submitted packages is quite complex, so it should be understandable that it takes time to review and adapt the package to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines. The other hasn't seen a new comment for only a week, so I really don't understand why Marcin threw the towel already. Regards, Dominik -- Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org Faith manages. -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:Confessions and Lamentations -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:02:05 -0400 Haïkel hgue...@fedoraproject.org wrote: ...snip... Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source would just hide this hideous behaviour. Well, sponsors are allowed to sponsor people, it's not abuse. If they don't properly mentor those packagers after that it's another matter, but thats much harder to tell from any kind of automated report. kevin pgpcdPNYJTUVI.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
2015-08-16 10:33 GMT-04:00 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com: On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:02:05 -0400 Haïkel hgue...@fedoraproject.org wrote: ...snip... Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source would just hide this hideous behaviour. Well, sponsors are allowed to sponsor people, it's not abuse. If they don't properly mentor those packagers after that it's another matter, but thats much harder to tell from any kind of automated report. kevin +2 Automated reports has little value by themselves, there are a lot of things that can't be measured like the amount of time spent on explaining/teaching packaging or guidelines on irc/mail. About the problem I was mentioning, I did some investigation and even contacted the sponsors and mentees. But naming people on a public list would just pour oil over fire. Rather than shaming the inactive sponsors that do no harm, we should rather fix the lack of mentoring of our new packagers. Some people forget that you don't need to be a sponsor to mentor new packager. Regards, H. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Hi, On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote: Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those sponsors who does not make his duty. Here comes this script: https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The current logic is: 1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors 2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package Review component which are assigned to this sponsor 3. give the sponsor some credit when he changed bug status (to whatever state) as this indicate some work on this bug 4. give the sponsor some credit if he remove FE-NEEDSPONSOR from blocking bugs as this indicate finishing sponsor work This does not reflect if you sponsor somebody directly. E.g. because he want to be become co-maintainer and does not submit package review. This time I run it for past year. So this script reveals those who does not sponsor anybody for whole year. I hope that in future I can lower this constant to half year or even 3 months. Ideas, patches and comments about this script are welcome. So, how are you going to address my issue? I always work using my email id which is associated with inactive/old FAS id but I never want to use email in bugzilla which is associated with my newly migrated FAS id. I have always kept a line between my fedora development/packaging work and my voluntary package review work. I know the intent behind this is to soon remove inactive sponsors from sponsors group. Regards, Parag. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those sponsors who does not make his duty. Here comes this script: https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The current logic is: 1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors 2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package Review component which are assigned to this sponsor 3. give the sponsor some credit when he changed bug status (to whatever state) as this indicate some work on this bug 4. give the sponsor some credit if he remove FE-NEEDSPONSOR from blocking bugs as this indicate finishing sponsor work This does not reflect if you sponsor somebody directly. E.g. because he want to be become co-maintainer and does not submit package review. This time I run it for past year. So this script reveals those who does not sponsor anybody for whole year. I hope that in future I can lower this constant to half year or even 3 months. Ideas, patches and comments about this script are welcome. Dear sponsor, remember that with great power comes great responsibility. You should regularly visit http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html and pick up some review. Only if this queue length is close to zero and people does not need to wait for sponsor, only then we can attract more packagers to Fedora. And here follows the output from my script (sorted by username). Mirek Aurelien Bompard abompard done no sponsor work Adrien Devresse adev done no sponsor work Adrian Reber adrian done no sponsor work Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1190728 Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1226926 Alexander Larsson alexl done no sponsor work Axel Thimm athimm done no sponsor work Dennis Gilmore ausil done no sponsor work Andrea Veri averi done no sponsor work Andreas Bierfert awjb done no sponsor work Björn besser82 Esser besser82 is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1129677 Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkabrda done no sponsor work Christian Iseli c4chris done no sponsor work Christopher Aillon (sabbatical, not receiving bugmail) caillon done no sponsor work Chitlesh GOORAH chitlesh done no sponsor work Ricky Elrod codeblock done no sponsor work Ralf Corsepius corsepiu done no sponsor work Cole Robinson crobinso done no sponsor work Chris Weyl cweyl done no sponsor work Christoph Wickert cwickert done no sponsor work Denis Leroy denis done no sponsor work Dave Malcolm dmalcolm done no sponsor work Douglas Schilling Landgraf dougsland is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1191498 David Woodhouse dwmw2 done no sponsor work Eduardo Echeverria echevemaster is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1141494 Michał Bentkowski ecik done no sponsor work Enrico Scholz ensc done no sponsor work Thomas Fitzsimmons fitzsim done no sponsor work Gérard Milmeister gemi done no sponsor work Marek Goldmann goldmann is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1213111 Haïkel Guémar hguemar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1090933 Haïkel Guémar hguemar is a good guy - worked on BZ 1150504 Haïkel Guémar hguemar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1196366 Haïkel Guémar hguemar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1219540 Haïkel Guémar hguemar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1231943 Haïkel Guémar hguemar is a good guy - worked on BZ 1241632 Haïkel Guémar hguemar is a good guy - worked on BZ 1241812 Haïkel Guémar hguemar is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1242011 Haïkel Guémar hguemar is a good guy - worked on BZ 1243048 Richard Shaw hobbes1069 done no sponsor work Ian Weller ianweller done no sponsor work Iain Arnell iarnell done no sponsor work Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams ivazquez done no sponsor work Andreas Thienemann ixs done no sponsor work José Matos jamatos is a good guy - worked on BZ 1126100 Jerry James jjames done no sponsor work Jesse Keating jkeating done no sponsor work John (J5) Palmieri johnp done no sponsor work Jose Pedro Oliveira jpo done no sponsor work Jaroslav Škarvada jskarvad is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1184040 Jef Spaleta jspaleta done no sponsor work Susi Lehtola jussilehtola done no sponsor work Jarod Wilson jwilson done no sponsor work Hans de Goede jwrdegoede done no sponsor work Kalev Lember kalev done no sponsor work Karsten Hopp karsten done no sponsor work Jeremy Katz katzj done no sponsor work David Nalley ke4qqq done no sponsor work Kevin Kofler kkofler done no sponsor work Ken Dreyer ktdreyer done no sponsor work Xavier Lamien laxathom done no sponsor work Jon Ciesla limb done no sponsor work Lubomir Rintel lkundrak is a good guy - removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 823679 Lubomir Rintel lkundrak is a good
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out? My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no longer work in Fedora Project, leaving the privilege to them is useless: Ricky Elrod codeblock Chitlesh GOORAH -- Yours sincerely, Christopher Meng http://awk.io -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
H == Haïkel hgue...@fedoraproject.org writes: H Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people H abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager H group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source H would just hide this hideous behaviour. I don't know if this has changed in he new age of having crazy human coding machines, but the last time i looked it was extremely difficult to see someone's sponsor and to generate statistics on sponsorship activities. I had some tooling a very long time ago which was used to stir up a whole pile of flames surrounding the handling of inactive sponsors. If FAS3 doesn't make that easier then I'll definitely have to file a few feature requests. - J -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 09:13:18AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The current logic is: 1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors 2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package Review component which are assigned to this sponsor 3. give the sponsor some credit when he changed bug status (to whatever state) as this indicate some work on this bug 4. give the sponsor some credit if he remove FE-NEEDSPONSOR from blocking bugs as this indicate finishing sponsor work I think the script should also consider comments to needsponsor bugs as sponsoring work, even if the bug was not yet assigned to someone. And IMHO the wording should be a little bit more friendly, e.g. no recent sponsor activity instead of no sponsor work. Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On 8/15/15, Pierre-Yves Chibon pin...@pingoured.fr wrote: Ricky Elrod codeblock Chitlesh GOORAH Sorry about the mistaken reply, I'm not sure about how many people match the standard of inactive, perhaps another thread needed? I agree we need to wipe off people carefully, but there must be a standard about the wipe. -- Yours sincerely, Christopher Meng http://awk.io -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Though it's always nice to read in the morning that you're a good guy, I have few comments. + some people have been recently given the sponsor bit + some people do actively help our new packagers to grow but it does not appear here + others have done a tremendous works as sponsors in the past and are still active helping around. Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source would just hide this hideous behaviour. Regards, H. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On 15/08/15 11:21, Christopher Meng wrote: And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out? My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no longer work in Fedora Project, leaving the privilege to them is useless: Perhaps. But the main problem is how to motivate more sponsors to actually do some sponsorship, right? Don't know if removing inactive people helps with that. But this script (and message) might. Why not just now wait a little, and see if/how the situation changes after this (actually great) info is visible? Cheers! --alec -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 05:21:21PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out? My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no longer work in Fedora Project, leaving the privilege to them is useless: Ricky Elrod codeblock Chitlesh GOORAH If Chitlesh is indeed no longer active on Fedora, you are wrong for Ricky, I have been seating next to him yesterday afternoon at flock and he is still active in different part of the project. Pierre -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Parag Nemade panem...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote: Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those sponsors who does not make his duty. Here comes this script: https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The current logic is: 1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors 2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package Review component which are assigned to this sponsor 3. give the sponsor some credit when he changed bug status (to whatever state) as this indicate some work on this bug 4. give the sponsor some credit if he remove FE-NEEDSPONSOR from blocking bugs as this indicate finishing sponsor work This does not reflect if you sponsor somebody directly. E.g. because he want to be become co-maintainer and does not submit package review. This time I run it for past year. So this script reveals those who does not sponsor anybody for whole year. I hope that in future I can lower this constant to half year or even 3 months. Ideas, patches and comments about this script are welcome. So, how are you going to address my issue? I always work using my email id which is associated with inactive/old FAS id but I never want to use email in bugzilla which is associated with my newly migrated FAS id. I have always kept a line between my fedora development/packaging work and my voluntary package review work. I know the intent behind this is to soon remove inactive sponsors from sponsors group. Just found one thing while triaging needsponsor reviews that loveshack is already sponsored but his one package submission was still blocking 177841. It will be good if either sponsorer or sponsoree will remove blocking to 177841 from all the reviews when someone gets sponsored his package in packager. Regards, Parag. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
