On 14/1/19 14:46, Javier Hernandez wrote:
Hey all,
first, thanks API for rolling that Accerciser release. It's great to see it moving again.
I dropped the API nickname, too confusing :P Jokes apart, thanks for replying.
And yeah, sorry for my silence, but I rarely check the GNOME channels on my email, Juanjo pinged me on Telegram about this thread.
As I already told to Alex and Samuel off-list a few months ago, I'd be really happy to get them involved so they can take over the maintenance of Accerciser. Nowadays, it's pretty hard for me to find the time to work on it, my spare time is very limited :/As I remember from those exchanges, the problem was that they didn't have a gnome git account and that I couldn't just give them control over it. I told them that the best way to go was to produce a few contributions first that we could use during an application process for a gnome account. In any case, I'm not sure if the process to get git access has changed in the past 3/4 years or if Samuel already got a gnome account (or not an account, but contributed patches to other GNOME projects). So from my side, nothing against having Samuel maintaining Accerciser as long as we can vouch for him for a gnome account.Reading here:
https://wiki.gnome.org/AccountsTeam/NewAccounts
the number of contributions needed are "reasonable amount of patches". I think that adding Samuel ATK and Accerciser patches, he fulfills that requisite. So I think that it would be good if Samuel request an account.
Cheers,Javi
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 11:29 AM apinheiro <apinheiro igalia com> wrote:
On 14/1/19 9:59, Alex ARNAUD wrote:
> Le 12/01/2019 à 11:01, apinheiro a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have just rolled a new Accerciser release. It is basically all
>> included on master since the last release. You can see the details on
>> the announcement I have just send.
>
> Thank you very much Alejandro for this.
You are welcome.
>
>> Ideally we would need the agreement of current maintainer. But as far as
>> I understand your previous email, you didn't get any answer from Javier.
>> Could you confirm that? If we don't get any answer from Javier, the
>> alternative is asking permission at desktop-devel-list gnome org (or
>> perhaps at the foundation list).
>
> I've contacted Javier to make the Samuel patches about the iPython5
> support available, he has made the review.
>
> I really respect the Javier work on Accerciser and his involvement on
> accessibility.
> I've contacted him privately the 2018-10-17 about Accerciser release
> without any answer from him.> I personally consider we shouldn't wait more because I shouldn't have
> to request a new release to a maintainer after years. I assume he no
> longer has the time to work on Accerciser.
Ok, then let's reduce my proposed two-weeks to one week. For two
reasons. First, I always tend to be conservative on this things, and
after all this time, and with a fresh release, waiting just one more
week shouldn't be a big deal. Second, because I bet that on
desktop-devel they will ask how much we waited from our last ping.
>
> @Alejandro: Does Samuel need to have a sponsor to become a maintainer ?
Well, not sure. This kind of maintainer reassignement without the
previous maintainer available are not usual, so I don't think that there
are a fixed list of requirements. I would personally propose Samuel as
maintainer, and list all the reasons of why that is a good idea. I hope
that's to be enough.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Best regards,
> Alex.
>