curl / Mailing Lists / curl-library / Single Mail


Re: inactive curl "owners"

From: Ray Satiro via curl-library <>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2017 14:01:38 -0400

On 8/22/2017 4:21 AM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
>> What we could do is change the default permissions from Write to None,
>> add everyone that's currently a Member to write curl/curl, and then
>> after 1 year (or 6 months.. whatever :) if they don't have any commits
>> then remove the write access and send a polite e-mail explaining that
>> they are still Members but write access was removed due to inactivity. I
>> think this is better than wholesale removing? them. This would likely
>> eventually transform Members into more of an alumni (congratulations:
>> you've graduated curl college) instead of being based on activity.
>> Activity would determine permissions but not membership. I'm not 100%
>> sure of no pitfalls, but what do you think of this idea?
> You are proposing an alternative approach but it is not immediately obvious
> what the advantages over Daniel's approach are. Could you please summarize
> which practical benefits it would bring?
> Is it just that former contributors would feel less bad with removed
> permissions compared to removed membership?
> If that is the case, then I really do not care myself. Historical data
> about past contributions are kept in git history, so it could potentially
> survive longer than anything specific to Github. And no, I do not need
> to be listed as an active member of the curl development team after few
> years of inactivity...

I am part of some advisory groups of which I am a member but not active.
I'm listed as a Member because of prior contributions. They are more
like alumni. If I need extra privileges I can ask for them but I have no
need to. I still have the ability to create groups and work on teams and
projects. That does not happen often if at all and I'm effectively inactive.

The practical benefit for the curl organization is for posterity and not
immediate, I just see that kind of membership as easier to manage rather
than have to potentially re-create a member and their settings. Daniel
disagrees, judging by his reply. And as things stand now it's only two
dozen people and their settings are the default so it is not a burden,
once they accept the invitation. Also, I like the curl college alumni
idea for morale but that could be besides addressing your point of
practical benefit.

Right now the default settings don't allow removing a Member's write
access because it's on for everyone by default. In other words without
changing that setting you'd have to remove someone or not (AFAIK). As
far as how removals could affect future participation or feelings, that
I don't know. I think this is just a difference in how one interprets
Members; you and Daniel see them as active participants and I've found
in other projects that's not always so.

We all agree I think that write access to curl/curl should be limited to
active members. That is what is happening and so I have had no
objection, just some feedback as part of a discussion that we could do
it differently. If nobody likes the idea I will not push it.

Received on 2017-08-22