We already have users and a newsitem - please don't forget developers :-) bonsaikitten@web.de
assigning to avenj. Jon, let me know when the trial period, etc. is completed (unless it already has been) and I"ll setup accounts, etc.
Name: Patrick Lauer Physical location: Germany Email: bonsaikitten@web.de Areas of responsibility: Cygwin @gentoo.org Email: Not added List subscription: Not added CVS Access: Not added IRC Access: unknown Bugzilla: Unchanged Mentor: pvdabeel Began probationary period: 9 July 03 ends 23 July 03 Announced: No bonsaikitten, there is a two week mentoring period before you become a dev during which time pvdabeel should monitor work you're doing. After that, we set you up with an account and train you. I consider the two week period to have begun a week ago, approximately when I was made aware of the project.
avenj, can you make bonsaikitten a developer? Pieter
I can't until copyright assignment docs are ready. Right now, Daniel is working on some changes that'll clarify the restricted scope of the documents.
Anything going on here?
I'm going to close this bug for now since there has been no response to our ping last month. You are welcome to reopen the bug when you have more time. Thanks!
He emailed me a couple of days ago, and said that he was ready to start working on gentoo again. I spoke with him on irc this morning, anc cleared up some concerns I had such as his lack of response to our ping. I gave him the quiz and copyright urls so he could start working on both. I think that I want to give him a week or two, and see how he does before I start going through the quiz with him etc.I mainly want to make sure that he will stick with the process. He also said that he wants his lawyers to read the copyright forms before he signs them Deedra
I was only kidding about the lawyers ... The copyright form should not be a problem.
We've received your quiz, and things look good. We still need your copyright form signed, and sent to recruiters@gentoo.org. Also need a public ssh2 dsa passworded key sent with the copyright form, and your public gpg key. Once we have those we can go on with your new dev process. But anyway, come talk to me on irc so I can go over a few points of your quiz with you. Thanks! Deedra
He's done:)
As patrick is representing GWN within userrel I would like him added to the user-relations alias please.
Patrick hasn't been a member of any teams for 2+ months now and I therefore consider him inactive. I've verified that he's not a member of GWN and User Relations with the leads of said teams. Retiring due to inactivity.
So yes, I'm not officially member of any teams. Didn't know about GWN, would have been nice if anyone had told me ... and someone by accident unsubscribed me from gwn-feedback. "Oops". No hard feelings there, but I'd appreciate some more communication. In the meantime I've gone bugwrangling, I've started to compile all packages: http://dev.gentooexperimental.org/tinderbox/ and will be filing bugs accordingly. Positive side-effect is that I'll find treecleaners some candidates. Wouldn't consider that inactive :-) And if I find the time (between work and changing jobs and most likely having to move) I'll get back to my usual GWN work.
i thought it was pretty obvious you were no longer doing GWN work and i'm not part of the GWN ... as for "usual GWN work", i dont recall seeing anything usual how does filing bugs require developer access ?
>>i thought it was pretty obvious you were no longer doing GWN work I stayed away from wolf31o2 for personal reasons, but that doesn't mean that I don't want to do GWN work anymore >> how does filing bugs require developer access ? How does actively working on stuff make me inactive? Not wanting to start a tedious discussion, but I think I'm quite active for being inactive. If it makes you happy I'll see that my name gets attached to a project or two, but I don't see how labeling things changes them. I just do what I do :-)
> > >> how does filing bugs require developer access ? > How does actively working on stuff make me inactive? > Not wanting to start a tedious discussion, but I think I'm quite active for > being inactive. If it makes you happy I'll see that my name gets attached to a > project or two, but I don't see how labeling things changes them. I just do > what I do :-) > Just attaching your name to a couple projects doesn't change the fact that you've been pretty much inactive besides a lot of talk on irc and occasional remarks on email. You haven't done much work at all besides GWN which you're no longer working on. And I don't see why you need to be a developer to help GWN either. As labeling things doesn't change them (I agree on that part) I'm going through with retiring you.
(In reply to comment #16) > You haven't done much work at all besides GWN which you're no longer working > on. And I don't see why you need to be a developer to help GWN either. > > As labeling things doesn't change them (I agree on that part) I'm going through > with retiring you. By these same standards, may I suggest that you also retire Ulrich Plate.
Infra, please retire.
(In reply to comment #18) > Infra, please retire. I don't yet see a retirement request for Ulrich Plate, who clearly matches the criteria for retirement you've applied here for Patrick. You're not practicing double standards because of your personal grudge against Patrick, are you Bryan? From my perspective as a user who has no grudge against either of these guys, it certainly looks that way.
he is slated to be retired, just settle down
(In reply to comment #19) > (In reply to comment #18) > > Infra, please retire. > > I don't yet see a retirement request for Ulrich Plate, who clearly matches the > criteria for retirement you've applied here for Patrick. You're not practicing > double standards because of your personal grudge against Patrick, are you > Bryan? From my perspective as a user who has no grudge against either of these > guys, it certainly looks that way. Go back and do your research -- Bryan has been filling out a TON of requests to retire various developers. I've seen close to 20 bug requests in the past 24 hours, all for retiring various developers. There's enough conspiracy theories running around -- please don't fuel the fire with your nonsense.
(In reply to comment #19) > (In reply to comment #18) > > Infra, please retire. > > I don't yet see a retirement request for Ulrich Plate, who clearly matches the > criteria for retirement you've applied here for Patrick. You're not practicing > double standards because of your personal grudge against Patrick, are you > Bryan? From my perspective as a user who has no grudge against either of these > guys, it certainly looks that way. > Like other people have already answered I've been filing a ton of retirement bugs. I'm not judging patrick any differently than all the other devs that haven't been doing any dev work for quite a while. It just happens to be absolutely impossible to handle all inactive devs at once. If you want to follow the progress you can search for bugs assigned to devrel@gentoo.org and subject matching Retire: * As klieber said I've asked infra to retire about 20 devs today after having their retirement bugs open for at least 2 weeks. Anyway, I'm well aware of Ulrichs activity (or lack there of) and will get to him in due time.
(In reply to comment #22) > Anyway, I'm well aware of Ulrichs activity (or lack there of) and will get to > him in due time. I'll take you word for that. The "due time" aspect was part of my contention however. One would think you'd go about this all by retiring the devs who are most inactive (or outright MIA like Ulrich) first, instead of someone who's been contributing more recently. That, coupled with your personal feelings towards Patrick, adds to the appearance of bias here.
(In reply to comment #23) > (In reply to comment #22) > > Anyway, I'm well aware of Ulrichs activity (or lack there of) and will get to > > him in due time. > > I'll take you word for that. The "due time" aspect was part of my contention > however. One would think you'd go about this all by retiring the devs who are > most inactive (or outright MIA like Ulrich) first, instead of someone who's > been contributing more recently. That, coupled with your personal feelings > towards Patrick, adds to the appearance of bias here. I don't think you understand the situation at all. It's entirely impossible to rank devs according to how inactive they are. And despite my feelings that patrick have sometimes screwed up I actually think he did a good (and important) job on GWN. If I retired patrick because I didn't like him or something like that I had retired him a long time ago. Anyway, I'm not sure you'll believe me but *none* of the devs I'm retiring gets retired because of my personal feelings. I'm quite cautious not to let anything like that interfere and I'm also retiring people I very much would have liked to keep on the project. Anyway, if you want to discuss this any further feel free to contact me by mail or on irc (nick kloeri).
(In reply to comment #23) > (In reply to comment #22) > > Anyway, I'm well aware of Ulrichs activity (or lack there of) and will get to > > him in due time. > > I'll take you word for that. The "due time" aspect was part of my contention > however. One would think you'd go about this all by retiring the devs who are > most inactive (or outright MIA like Ulrich) first, instead of someone who's > been contributing more recently. That, coupled with your personal feelings > towards Patrick, adds to the appearance of bias here. > The only bias I've seen is from you. The reasons he gave were factual and not opinionated. Besides, let Patrick defend his inactivity. Its his devship that's at stake, not yours. Please stop digging up crap that just isn't there and making assumptions.
> The only bias I've seen is from you. The reasons he gave were factual and not > opinionated. Besides, let Patrick defend his inactivity. What inactivity? I've been quite busy filing bugs with my shiny new tinderbox, that doesn't seem inactive to me. I've recently graduated from University, now working, about to change jobs again - that mildly affects the amount of time I have available. So I'm doing what is basically a QA job, building packages, noticing failures, filing bugs. Now I don't care much for titles, so I never forced myself on the QA team. So, I'm asking QA if they mind if I join them officially (to satisfy kloeri and his labelling madness), and they don't want me as I get retired. Hey, nice logical loop. GWN was a hostile takeover, so it seems quite absurd that people acuse me of inactivity when they basically ban me from any "official" activity. Teh sigh. Makes me wonder why I spend so much time and energy on things like getting infra a shiny new server (which they haven't used in 6 months) or organizing the FOSDEM presence (from 130km away because noone else did). Now I'm wondering, why isn't jakub retired too? No need for him to have dev status, right? And why are inactive people (like pfeifer) not retired even when they are totally absent for months? Sigh. Well, as spb said that he'll consider allowing me to join QA when I have cvs commit rights I've asked Jokey to be my mentor, and he agrees. Thus I would not in any way consider myself inactive. Just in transition ... Kloeri: You haven't spoken to me before opening this bug. I really dislike your passive-agressive way of handling conflicts by avoiding them. If you have a problem just say it, my telepathic skills are below average ...
(In reply to comment #26) > So I'm doing what is basically a QA job, building packages, noticing failures, > filing bugs. Now I don't care much for titles, so I never forced myself on the > QA team. So, I'm asking QA if they mind if I join them officially (to satisfy > kloeri and his labelling madness), and they don't want me as I get retired. > Hey, nice logical loop. GWN was a hostile takeover, so it seems quite absurd > that people acuse me of inactivity when they basically ban me from any > "official" activity. Teh sigh. There's absolutely no labeling madness here. Inactive devs gets retired whenever I get around to them, it's as simple as that. > Now I'm wondering, why isn't jakub retired too? No need for him to have dev > status, right? And why are inactive people (like pfeifer) not retired even when > they are totally absent for months? Jakub is extremely active if you haven't noticed. > > Sigh. > Well, as spb said that he'll consider allowing me to join QA when I have cvs > commit rights I've asked Jokey to be my mentor, and he agrees. Thus I would not > in any way consider myself inactive. Just in transition ... > > Kloeri: You haven't spoken to me before opening this bug. I really dislike your > passive-agressive way of handling conflicts by avoiding them. > If you have a problem just say it, my telepathic skills are below average ... I quite often open retirement bugs and wait for the (supposed) inactive devs to prove me wrong. One thing I think you've completely misunderstood however is that being retired doesn't mean you're not allowed to come back. It only means that I want to see some actual dev activity on a somewhat steady basis before you come back. And if you decide to come back I hope you'd be so kind as to drop the paranoia. But let me repeat one final time: I'm *not* out to get you for some imagined personal reasons.
Seems there is no forums account to retire.
(In reply to comment #28) > Seems there is no forums account to retire. > I used to have one, check for the name of "bonsaikitten" - but I'd suggest y'all delay the whole retiring thing as I'm not really inactive. kloeri: I'm not paranoid, it's just your way of handling this (including not even once pinging me before to see what my status is) that makes me think you're trying to handle a personal conflict with me through indirection. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose ...
No need to delay anything. I'm not changing my mind and I've already explained what's needed if patrick wants to return as a dev in the future.
Hmm. Weird thing ... I've been unable to find any kind of official policy on this whole retiring thing. I'd appreciate it if anyone could point me at the official guidelines/policy. (In reply to comment #30) > No need to delay anything. I'm not changing my mind Ah ok then. I'm not changing my mind either, but let's not get all subjective here. > and I've already explained what's needed if patrick wants to return as a dev in the future. Not really, and I don't see the point of retiring me just to have me back next week. "I want to see some actual dev activity on a somewhat steady basis before you come back." is, again, very subjective (and me filing close to 60 QA bugs yesterday is ... nothing?) *shrug*
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml#doc_chap3 Sure looks like a policy in documentation to me. But I have to admit that its a bit vague on what exactly 'inactivity' really means. I'll leave that up to devrel to make that decision which they already have.
(In reply to comment #32) > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml#doc_chap3 > > Sure looks like a policy in documentation to me. I fail to see the relevant bits - I'm not on a leave of absence > But I have to admit that its a > bit vague on what exactly 'inactivity' really means. I'll leave that up to > devrel to make that decision which they already have. > Hmm ... doesn't look like anything you could evaluate objectively to me, I'd prefer something a bit less circular. Defining inactivity as inactivity is a bit absurd ...
(In reply to comment #33) > (In reply to comment #32) > > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml#doc_chap3 > > > > Sure looks like a policy in documentation to me. > > I fail to see the relevant bits - I'm not on a leave of absence "An extended leave of absence is defined as inactivity for any period of time longer than 60 days" Gee, reading is so hard these days...
(In reply to comment #34) > (In reply to comment #33) > > (In reply to comment #32) > > > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml#doc_chap3 > > > > > > Sure looks like a policy in documentation to me. > > > > I fail to see the relevant bits - I'm not on a leave of absence > > "An extended leave of absence is defined as inactivity for any period of time > longer than 60 days" > > Gee, reading is so hard these days... > I agree. quote: > > I fail to see the relevant bits - I'm not on a leave of absence Now please point me at some definition of inactivity and stop repeating yourself, that doesn't increase the thruthiness of what you say.
Done from infra's end.
(In reply to comment #35) > thruthiness "Thruthiness?" That's not even a word!
(In reply to comment #36) > Done from infra's end. > Thanks for cutting me off from my bugmail and deactivating my account with no prior warning. Guys, wth is wrong with you?
I am only following the procedure that we've done for the last year for retiring people. Devrel said to go ahead, so I'm went ahead (along with about 15-20 other devs tonight). If you have any other complaints this bug isn't the place and complaining to infra isn't the right place either (as I'm just following what we've done in the past, no special treatment). If you have a problem with this then take it up with devrel. I'm done wasting my time arguing with you on this topic.
(In reply to comment #38) > Thanks for cutting me off from my bugmail Please see http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml#doc_chap3_sect2: "Gentoo email addresses for retired developers will remain as forwards for a period of thirty (30) days to allow developers time to transition their mail." If there wasn't a thirty (30 - oh why do we have to say the same thing in our "policies" twice?) days period, it was an error that should be fixed.
Why do devs have to be forcefully retired at all? I got admin access on Wikipedia a long time ago because I was a very active user. I have now been almost completely inactive on Wikipedia for the past 2 years but they haven't booted me and I hope they never do. The same reasons they made me an admin originally haven't changed. I don't see why you should have to be active to remain a dev in gentoo. In my mind, the more people with commit access the better, as it will make it easier for people to fix bugs. Anyways, I subscribe to the planet gentoo feed and I have been following patrick's work and it sounds like he is pretty damn active to me, with his tinderboxing work.
(In reply to comment #41) > Why do devs have to be forcefully retired at all? I got admin access on > Wikipedia a long time ago because I was a very active user. I have now been > almost completely inactive on Wikipedia for the past 2 years but they haven't > booted me and I hope they never do. Then Wikimedia obviously has a lack of competence concerning security issues. > The same reasons they made me an admin > originally haven't changed. I don't see why you should have to be active to > remain a dev in gentoo. In my mind, the more people with commit access the > better, as it will make it easier for people to fix bugs. Ever tried to civilize a chicken herd? "Plenty helps plenty" isn't true in any relation. > Anyways, I subscribe to the planet gentoo feed and I have been following > patrick's work and it sounds like he is pretty damn active to me, with his > tinderboxing work. And this last part is leading me to the (interesting) question: Why do so many non-devs or never-been-devs leave comments over here? Never saw that in an 'internal' bug back in my active days. However, being inactive for months and then suddenly returning out of the dark when access-termination is imminent doesn't justify a abandonment of termination in my opinion.
All done.
buhahahahahaha
Look who wants back!
(In reply to comment #45) > Look who wants back! > Good to see this.
This needs some discussion. I see no mention by Patrick himself and also need indication as to what he wishes to do, which teams he wishes to join, etc etc.
(In reply to comment #47) > This needs some discussion. I see no mention by Patrick himself and also need > indication as to what he wishes to do, which teams he wishes to join, etc etc. > I don't fully understand your comment. Are you just taking part in the normal reinstatement process or do you think there is something for devrel to discuss before going forward with the normal process?
Simply makes sense that the dev-to-be requests it rather than others requesting on his behalf with no confirmation of his actual desire. Also seemed good that the dev-to-be has a role to fill or it looks like we're giving out developer status as some sort of status symbol. Honestly this bug could easily be a joke played on who knows who without some clarification. Dont get me wrong, I acknowledge, fully support, and appreciate the work Patrick has done (having told him so previously) as an IRC op but many IRC ops are not devs so I'm unclear as to what the role intent is and think clarification is a simple request. Patrick is CC'd on this bug so he could comment any time now. :)
(In reply to comment #49) > Simply makes sense that the dev-to-be requests it rather than others requesting > on his behalf with no confirmation of his actual desire. Let me say then that I do wish to return to full dev status. > Also seemed good that > the dev-to-be has a role to fill If you look at my bug list I have something near 250 open bugs, which come from my "build all packages in the tree" attempts. Being able to fix those would make things easier for all involved. Maybe that can even become a QA subproject at some time ... I've been managing the kdesvn-portage overlay, we were the first to have KDE 4.1 ebuilds. Helping out the KDE herd and getting our bugfixes pushed into the main tree faster should be fun (as long as the KDE herd accepts me as a member, but I think they are currently happy with any help they can get). > or it looks like we're giving out developer > status as some sort of status symbol. Honestly this bug could easily be a joke > played on who knows who without some clarification. No, I've talked with Caster and dared him to reopen the bug. Not a joke. > Dont get me wrong, I acknowledge, fully support, and appreciate the work > Patrick has done (having told him so previously) as an IRC op but many IRC ops > are not devs so I'm unclear as to what the role intent is and think > clarification is a simple request. Patrick is CC'd on this bug so he could > comment any time now. :) Well, now I am CCed :)
> > Also seemed good that the dev-to-be has a role to fill > If you look at my bug list I have something near 250 open bugs, which come > from my "build all packages in the tree" attempts. Being able to fix those > would make things easier for all involved. I like the motivation but you will need to work with the devs who own those packages. I dont condone the territorial attitude of 'my package' but we need to work on that attitude rather than be a slap in the face for anyone. :-P > I've been managing the kdesvn-portage overlay, we were the first to have KDE > 4.1 ebuilds. Talk to the KDE folks, I know they are going through a re-org/clean-up phase but good to let them know your interest and get their thoughts. > Well, now I am CCed :) Sorry I thought bonsaikitten@web.de was you but see that you changed it today so perhaps not.
As discussed on IRC, we would really appreciate having Patrick on the team. Most people of the team are currently inactive and we can use every help we can get. Also, Patrick did a great work with the kde-4.1 ebuilds in his overlay (although they can be a bit improved).
(In reply to comment #52) ++ I agree with keytoaster
After a couple review sessions and quiz correction rounds: What we did: - LDAP - gentoo-core - bugzilla - cvs/svn groups on cvs.gentoo.org - IRC-cloak - announcement What you need to do: - subscribe to mailing lists with @gentoo.org address - request forum status bump in #gentoo-forums or by mail to forum-mods@gentoo.org (if you have a forums count) - add yourself to mail aliases ( like java@gentoo.org ) see /var/mail/alias on dev.gentoo.org - set lat and lon attributes in LDAP if you want others to know where exactly you are located - set gentooIM if you want people to be able to contact you via other means than email For the mentor: - You are also responsible for the commits of your recruit during the first month so you should watch the commits of your recruit via gentoo-commits mailing list.
First mail sent.
Patrick has resumed committing.
