[webkit-dev] Sunsetting committership and reviewership

[Eric Seidel]

Unrelated to Dmitry's suggestion, but since I brought up "emeritus
contributors" earlier in the thread, I should explain my usage.  The
"emeritus" class proposed in the ancient webkit-reviewers thread about
sunsetting was simply to answer the fact that committers.py has two
purposes:

1. It exists as a public Access Control List (ACL) for svn.webkit.org
(since I know of no other public ACL).
2. It exists as a way for our tools to lookup Contributor objects
based on name, irc nick, svn email etc.

"emeritus" contributors (in my original proposal on webkit-reviewers
years ago) only exist to serve the second purpose, not the first.
This would be similar to the "Contributor" and "Account" superclasses
which have (since that old thread) been added to committers.py to
allow committers.py to list non-commiters and even bots which we might
want to have in our CC list, but not give any privileges to.

Again, my thoughts on this may bear no reflection to what Dmitry had
in mind with his use of the word "emeritus", so I should let him
speak!

On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com> wrote:
> Interesting.  What privileges, if any, would you propose 'emeritus
> reviewers' to have?
>
> -Filip
>
>
> On Apr 9, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Dmitry Titov <dimich at chromium.org> wrote:
>
> How about creating an 'emeritus reviewer' status (no r+ power) and let
> people *voluntarily* move themselves to this status? I bet a lot of
> 'inactive reviewers' would do that, since everybody understands the issue of
> getting out of sync with current code base. It may have different vibe
> though than figuring some automatic time-based enforcement system...
>
> As an added bonus, this gives such people a good way to avoid being asked to
> "review a patch for a colleague" while keeping some ties with the project...
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Apr 7, 2013, at 5:53 PM, Benjamin Poulain <benjamin at webkit.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Timothy Hatcher <timothy at apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think 6 months is fine for deactivating SVN accounts. And a full revoke
>>> of reviewer status after 2 years of no activity sounds reasonable to me. We
>>> could make it easier to get reviewer status again after a 2 year sunset if
>>> the person becomes active again and shows good judgment still.
>>
>>
>> +1 to this.
>>
>> I think 2 years to revoke reviewer rights is too long. All the drive-by
>> reviews that have caused problems were from reviewers that were inactive for
>> less than 2 years. Nevertheless, 2 years is better than the current
>> situation so it is a good start.
>>
>>
>> We sometimes get low-quality drive-by reviews even from people who are
>> active at the time. I feel like that's not the right basis for the time
>> cutoff. If we do have a sunset period, we should think about it in terms of
>> how long it takes to be so out of touch with the current state of the
>> project that there's little chance you can give a useful review.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Maciej
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
>> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>