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. Fabio -- _______________________________________________ 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
