On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 6:44 AM Fabio Valentini <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 12:21 PM Neal Gompa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 12:19 PM Mattia Verga via devel-announce > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > In accordance with FESCo's Inactive Packager Policy[1], packagers that > > > have been identified > > > as inactive have a ticket in the find-inactive-packagers repo[2]. One > > > week after the final > > > release, packagers who remain inactive will be removed from the packager > > > group. (Note that > > > pagure.io is one of the systems checked for activity, so commenting on > > > your ticket that you're > > > still around will prevent you from showing up in the second round.) > > > > > > If you have suggestions for improvement, look for the open feature > > > issues[3] and file an issue > > > in the find-inactive-packagers repo[4] if it's not there already. > > > > > > For the curious, here are the stats from today's run: > > > > > > ### Found 1459 users in the packager group. ### > > > ### Found 606 users with no builds in Koji over the last year. ### > > > ### Found 305 users with no activity in pagure/src.fp.org over the last > > > year. ### > > > ### Found 282 users which didn't post any message in Fedora Discussion > > > over the last year. ### > > > ### Found 254 users which also show no activity in Bodhi over the last > > > year. ### > > > ### Found 234 users which also show no activity in mailing lists over the > > > last year. ### > > > ### Found 167 users which also show no activity in Bugzilla over the last > > > year. ### > > > > > > [1] > > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_inactive_packagers/ > > > [2] > > > https://pagure.io/find-inactive-packagers/issues?tags=inactive_packager&status=Open > > > [3] https://pagure.io/find-inactive-packagers/issues?tags=feature > > > [4] https://pagure.io/find-inactive-packagers/new_issue > > > > > > > This is kind of horrifying, but also I wonder if these people look > > like they're inactive because they're over-relying on Packit to do > > their work. > > > > For example, linux-system-roles got auto-orphaned once because the > > packager set up fire-and-forget Packit configuration years ago and > > they proceeded to do nothing else in Fedora. > > > > It wouldn't surprise me if some Packit adoption is responsible for a > > large chunk of this. > > I don't think this can be the case - you still need to minimally > interact with src.fp.o to get packit-created PRs moving, as far as I > know ... so that would count as "activity" here. >
You do not have to, I believe you can give packit direct commit privileges and then it's completely hands-free. But even if not, that would still mean those users have no builds ever, since packit is the registered user for those builds. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
