On 06/19/2018 11:17 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 at 17:56 Guido van Rossum wrote:
I'd do it as follows. This basically makes withdrawal voluntary unless they don't respond at all.
Make a list of people who've not shown any sign of activity (on the b.p.o. or GitHub, as reviewer or committer) for at least one year.
Email all of them, asking if they still want to be a core dev. Choices could include  a. Yes  b. Keep the logo and b.p.o. access but disable GitHub key  c. Drop everything
If someone doesn't respond despite repeated attempts (maybe using different email addresses or social media) then after 4 weeks assume they meant to answer (c). But if they write back later they can be restored according to their preference (a, b, c), no questions asked.
One point I want to make about this pull approach versus a push one is this is going to be a lot of work. :) For the "no GitHub username" situation on bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org there are 80 people to reach out to. For people with commit rights who have not committed in the past year to CPython (because that's the best data point I have without writing custom code to find out who has commented on a PR recently), that would require reaching out to an additional 50 people. So we're looking at potentially up to 130 people to try and track down.
I'm happy to do this.
We can make a complete list as people seem to want that and have it be active versus emeritus and list the year people got their commit rights.
At the end of that month whomever is still listed as emeritus we turn off their commit access and b.p.o extras. We announce this here, python-dev, social media, etc. IOW this becomes more opt-in/push than opt-out/pull.
The problem with this approach as it's one time -- as soon as someone fades away it's once again out of date.
I'll take on the task of contacting the 130 people to get this started, then once a year somebody does the same thing with whichever handful of people have gone dormant that year.
Sound fair?
-- ~Ethan~