Removing active maintainers

[Erich Hoover]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Remco <remco47 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Rosanne DiMesio<dimesio at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:48:17 +0200
> > Remco <remco47 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, I thought everybody got their AppDB updates by mail. But whichever
> >> way you receive notice of queued submissions without maintainers,
> >> that's where the maintained submissions can be sent after 24 hours.
> >>
> >> Remco
> >
> > Admins can already see all test reports in the queue. That's not the
> issue. The issue is removing maintainers who aren't doing their job. If we
> do their job for them, with no consequences to the negligent maintainer,
> that merely covers up the problem.
>
> So the issue is not that queued submissions aren't handled, but...
> what? I thought the problem was unhandled submissions, caused by
> negligent maintainers. But if that problem is not there, what problem
> are negligent maintainers causing?
>
> Remco
>
>
It sounds like they're causing too much extra work for the admins.  What if
the system checked for "Out of Office" bounces and used that to know that a
maintainer was not going to be able to handle the submission for a while?

Erich Hoover
ehoover at mines.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20090629/5e1b3303/attachment.htm>