mirror of
https://github.com/semver/semver.git
synced 2026-07-10 19:50:47 -05:00
[GH-ISSUE #536] Request to be a maintainer #6384
No Assignees
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: github-starred/semver#6384
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @alexandrtovmach on GitHub (Sep 27, 2019).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/semver/semver/issues/536
In both repos we have a lot of staled issues and PR's:
https://github.com/semver/semver.org
https://github.com/semver/semver
I'd be happy to help with that, but I need maintainers rights.
Could someone help with that?
@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2019):
See the SemVer Team section of the Contributing.md file regarding maintainers.
You can always do what I have done, and @OP a reply to get the original poster to close out their threads. When I first started doing that a few years back there were a couple hundred of them. The current maintainers are all language/package tooling stakeholders.
@steveklabnik commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2019):
Yep, I’ve been slowly going through things, but haven’t had as much time recently. I plan on picking things up again soon.
Moving slowly is good for specifications; there’s no rush here.
@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2019):
@steveklabnik, from what I can tell, you are doing a pretty good job. We've been holding the ~80 issues range for a long time and I haven't been putting in anywhere near the time I used to. Pretty sure that I've either requested closure or promotion of every open thread that is more than 6 months old. But there are some sticky issues that I think should be killed off with an official "never going there" statement. How likely is it that SemVer would ever be extended to cover 4 or more version fields?
A doc covering minimal requirements for a v3 proposal would be a good way to quash a lot of old v3 proposals. For instance, any proposal that doesn't solve the SemVer version string ambiguity issue should be dismissed as incomplete.
Personally, I am betting on VersionMeta and VersionSchema to supersede SemVer over the next eight to ten years or so.
@steveklabnik commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2019):
Yes, I agree that a “we’re not doing this” document of sorts would be good. I have not found the time to write such a thing up and solicit feedback from the other maintainers yet. But it’s on my list.
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2019):
@jwdonahue @steveklabnik Thank you for responses. I also agree with statement "moving slowly is good for specifications", but I don't want to change something especially in spec, I just want to resolve a ton of issues and PRs about "typos, mistakes, translations"
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2019):
@anangaur @dherman @indirect @isaacs @segiddins @steveklabnik
Sorry for ping, I tagged all of you from the list here
As you can see from this issue — I want to be a maintainer, but my focus is not to change the specification. I just want to help with issues and PR's related to translations, typos, formatting and probably code updates. Here is a lot of them:
...etc.
I totally understand that you guys haven't free time to work with that, but I have time and I enjoy it =)
@indirect commented on GitHub (Oct 5, 2019):
I'm in favor 👍
@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Oct 6, 2019):
@alexandrtovmach, do you comprehend any of those languages?
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Oct 7, 2019):
@jwdonahue Not sure, do you asking about languages to translate? Yes, I'm native speaker for Russian and Ukrainian
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Feb 24, 2020):
@anangaur @dherman @isaacs @segiddins @steveklabnik
friendly ping =)
@segiddins commented on GitHub (Feb 24, 2020):
I 👍 'd @indirect's reply a few months ago ;)
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Feb 24, 2020):
@segiddins thank you, but could someone add me maintainer rights to repo?))
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Apr 16, 2020):
ping
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (May 12, 2020):
⏲️ ping ping
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (May 23, 2020):
@anangaur @dherman @indirect @isaacs @segiddins @steveklabnik
If there are no objections, could someone give me a maintainer rights, so I can manage issues and PRs?
@runeimp commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2020):
I realize that the owners (@anangaur @dherman @indirect @isaacs @segiddins @steveklabnik) are probably very busy and SemVer is very low priority for them at this point (not that they don't continue to contribute). I realize that the world around us seems to be crumbling due to COVID-19. But seriously!
I expected this issue to languish for a few months. I get it, everyone is busy, and no one wants to deal with the aftermath if things go wrong. What else is needed to resolve this before we hit the first anniversary of it's submittal, or as it seems to be going, the second, or third anniversary?
@indirect commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2020):
@alexandrtovmach you have the patience of a saint, and I apologize for the long delay. Check your email for an invitation to semver/semver and semver/semver.org.
@runeimp your post is inflammatory, and absolutely in violation of this project's code of conduct. If you continue in this manner, expect a ban from this GitHub organization's repositories. Instead, please apologize and try to post with more empathy in the future.
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2020):
@indirect Thank you for invite 👍 I'm finally get it 🎉 🎉 🎉
@runeimp it looks like you tried to support me, thanks, but I agree with @indirect, your comment looks a little rude, but I think you didn’t mean anything bad, right?
@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2020):
@runeimp 's comments were spot-on, and seemed quite gentle to me. I can empathize somewhat with the maintainers. It's hard finding time for this sort of thing when you have a day job and I know from personal experience how the CoVid19 crises can really mess with well planned schedules.
Still, I think an application to the maintainers list should be rejected or accepted within a reasonable period of time. I think PR's should be accepted or tagged and rejected within a reasonable period of time as well. This site is showing signs of mortality. It used to be we only had to get the attention of one maintainer to get some traction now and then, now we have to get the attention of the entire group of maintainers and hope enough of them can be bothered to reach a consensus and at least one of them acting on it.
@runeimp commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2020):
@alexandrtovmach I'm glad you are finally getting the access you requested. I look forward to your contributions.
@indirect I am a very empathetic person. I do not enjoy being rude or inflammatory in any way. It was in fact rather painful to write the comment in question. More so because I felt the need to be so blunt in order to get things moving. Even more so because it puts into stark contrast the difference between my early interactions with the project and what it had become with that post. I don't want to see this project die on the vine when it was bearing fruit before I ever heard of it and I feel it's just as relevant now as it was then, so many years ago. Aside from all of that, thank you for giving @alexandrtovmach the access he was requesting.
@indirect commented on GitHub (Jun 10, 2020):
@jwdonahue your feedback about what you consider gentle is appreciated. However, sarcastic attacks on the maintainers are not acceptable here, whether or not the maintainers are doing what you consider to be a good job.
@runeimp It's valid to feel like you need to be blunt. It is also clear both in the code of conduct and in my previous message that your tone and language is not acceptable here, regardless of how you feel about the project or the maintainers. Since you decided to defend your violation instead of apologizing and agreeing to follow the CoC in the future, I am awarding you a one week ban.
Please follow the code of conduct after that week is up, so we can collaborate productively from that point forward.
@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Jun 10, 2020):
@indirect, Sir, please add me to the ban list as well. I will happily wear that badge proudly and loudly.
As a maintainer, you are free to be as arbitrary as you like, so you might as well ban me too and make it permanent.
@haacked FYI.
@ljharb commented on GitHub (Jun 10, 2020):
@indirect commented on GitHub (Jun 10, 2020):
Just in case anyone needs a detailed breakdown of the ways that the comment violated the code of conduct, I wrote them in reply to @jwdonahue's issue #571. I'm going to lock this ticket now, and hopefully we can move on to other, more productive, things.