Hyrum K Wright wrote on Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 09:29:47 -0600:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 5:04 AM, Julian Foad <julian.foad_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> > Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >> I'd rather not remove their entries entirely from COMMITTERS.
> >
> > +1. Being unable to contact them (currently) is a completely different
> > thing from deciding to remove them from the list of committers. And
> > failure to keep one's email address up to date is not a serious breach
> > of committership responsibilities, for an inactive or infrequent
> > committer, I'd say.
>
> Oh, I'm not claiming we do some irrevocable revocation of their commit
> privileges.
I didn't think you were suggesting anything of that sort.
However, removing names from COMMITTERS seems like we dismiss our own
historical contributors. I'd prefer to move them to a "dormant
committers" or "uncontactable committers" or "emeriti" section.
> The fact is that they just don't currently *have* commit
> access. They couldn't even commit if they wanted to, due to the lack
> of an account at the ASF.
>
> I don't think we have to forget these folks (who have obviously given
> valuable contributions in the past), just that it makes little sense
> to call them committers, since they can't commit.
>
I suppose we could mark somehow those who don't have commit access
to /repos/asf/subversion.
> >> Just remove the (now-bogus) email addresses perhaps?
> >
> > Only if you're sure the email addresses are permanently defunct and not
> > merely temporarily rejecting our attempts to contact them.
>
> We could cross this list with a similar one I sent to private@ a few
> months ago when trying to contact the various translators.
>
> -Hyrum
Received on 2011-01-28 20:47:56 CET