#2148 Somewhat nonrepsonsive maintainer kushal
Closed: Invalid by churchyard. Opened by churchyard.

Hey. I've been trying to reach @kushal over tunir Python 3 compatibility.

  1. We've opened the bugzilla almost 2 years ago in August 2017.
  2. I've been trying to get some action from @kushal since March 2019. He occasionally responds but nothing ever changed.
  3. I've been e-mailing, IRCing and whatnot to @kushal ever since. He occasionally responds but nothing ever changed.
  4. I've clearly stated in the bugzilla that he is no longer responsive on 2019-05-27.
  5. I've bumped that on 2019-06-03.
  6. I've sent an e-mail to devel on 2019-06-03. Got a recommendation to use IRC or Twitter.
  7. I got a response on #fedora-devel IRC on the same day, see below (times in UTC+2), but nothing changed.
  8. I've sent another reminders on 2019-06-10 and today.
(14:31:01) kushal: mhroncok, I was trying to reply in the bugzilla as the first thing in the morning https://twitter.com/kushaldas/status/1135395766875201537
(14:31:47) mhroncok: kushal: hi!
(14:32:11) mhroncok: kushal: you keep getting that?
(14:33:35) kushal: yeah, for now let me fix your trouble, we can fix mine later :)
(14:34:03) kushal: mhroncok, I thought I merged my python3 branch for tunir but after I replied to you last time, I figured I lost that code
(14:34:14) kushal: mhroncok, so let me orphan the package for now.
(14:34:22) kushal: mhroncok, we can repackage it later,
(14:34:30) kushal: mhroncok, is that a good path?
(14:35:49) mhroncok: kushal: yes, it is
(14:36:02) mhroncok: kushal: thank you
(14:39:50) kushal: mhroncok, Also, please ping me over IRC for a faster response
(14:40:10) mhroncok: kushal: will do. 
(14:42:55) kushal: mhroncok, thank you :)

I can clearly say that @kushal is responsive, yet the responses are not helpful. I don't think we have a policy for that, but I feel like I've tried enough.

I wish to retire tunir.

I wish to take over of mu, uflash, python-chardet (I already practically maintain those).

I think we should orphan the rest, but I won't push strongly if others disagree.


I'm an idiot, he actually retired the package. Sorry for the noise.

Metadata Update from @churchyard:
- Issue close_status updated to: Invalid
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

For the record: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers#Exception_procedure , specifically "There are some cases where it may be needed to reassign a package even if this procedure has not yet finished. Examples include [...] maintainer response prevents the non-responsive process from proceeding without actually resuming maintenance. In such cases, this exception procedure can be used."

That was my idea here, except it was no longer needed.

Metadata