Re: Re: [RFC] orphan extensions cleanup

On 12.06.2018 at 23:33, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >>> I'm afraid this might be misused.  It's too easy to update the year >>> number, without actually doing *any* real maintenance work (“I'll come >>> back to that later” …).  Some automated process would be nice, but >>> manually checking the bug tracker for maintenance work (particularly >>> wrt. security issues), and/or the commit log seems to be okay for now. >> >> That sounds like you're looking for a technical solution to an >> organisational / social problem: if someone lists themselves as a >> maintainer, they are making a commitment to volunteer their effort. That >> commitment could be defined somewhere if it's not already, but it's >> never going to be an automatically measurable SLA. > > I agree here. If somebody cares enough to update the number, and by that > commit to maintainership, this is already more than halfway towards the > solution. We can never force anyone to be an active maintainer, or to > allocate specific amount of time to fixing bugs or develop features, but > the problem now is that we don't even have anybody in any maintainership > capacity. We've had some people listed that haven't been active for > years, and just remain there by default. I think once we solve this > problem and have explicit commitment from maintainers, the question of > how to make this commitment turn into a real work will be much better > problem to have. We will still have to deal with it, obviously, but I > think we first have to even get there. Okay, you've convinced me. :) -- Christoph M. Becker