[QGIS-Developer] qgis/QGIS repo: revoking commit rights on "dormant" contributors

[Stefanos Natsis]

Hi Nyall,

> Could we also require that a dormant committer MUST have had a commit
reviewed and merged back to master before their rights can be reinstated?

I think it would actually make sense to raise that requirement to 5 or 10
PRs, one is none!

Stefanos

On Tue, 13 Oct 2026 at 22:51, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer <
qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:

> Thanks for kicking these discussions off again Alessandro! Let's get it
> sorted for good this time 😁
>
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2026 at 18:30, Alessandro Pasotti via QGIS-Developer <
> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> - create a github "fake" core committers repository with just a README
>> inside
>> - create a "QGIS Committers" team that has commit rights in the "fake"
>> repo
>> - put every contributor that currently have commit rights in any of
>> the qgis org repositories into the "QGIS Committers" team
>> - for all repositories except the "fake" one: revoke commit rights to
>> all developers that haven't committed anything in the last 6 months
>>
>
> Could we loosen that "hasn't committed anything" to "hasn't had a commit
> merged to master OR actively participated in the pull request process by
> either explicitly approving or rejecting a PR"? There's some core
> committers who now basically only participate in pull request reviewing
> (and that's ok, it still shows that they're actively involved!). Note that
> I intentionally didn't include "commenting" here, or merging a pull request
> already reviewed by others, but rather only the "active" tasks of
> explicitly approving/rejecting.
>
>
>>
>> Note: committers that need their commit rights back will just need to
>> ask to get them back.
>>
>
> Could we also require that a dormant committer MUST have had a commit
> reviewed and merged back to master before their rights can be reinstated? I
> think that's a fair enough requirement. To pick a random example -- if
> Larry (dakcarto) asked to be reinstated, we'd want to first ensure he's
> back up to date with the current development practices, state of the
> codebase, and all associated policies. So we require that they've had
> another successful contribution following the dormant period before giving
> them back the git rights. That shouldn't be a big ask, and I'd expect that
> all contributors would be ok with the extra step.
>
> Nyall
>
>>
>> This way we don't need to change the statute of the QGIS association
>> (and wait for the next AGM).
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alessandro Pasotti
>> QCooperative:  www.qcooperative.net
>> ItOpen:   www.itopen.it
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-Developer mailing list
>> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
> _______________________________________________
> QGIS-Developer mailing list
> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20261014/8e3f10e8/attachment-0001.htm>