I do wonder what the etiquette is for merging these merge requests — I sometimes have time to review them, but I don’t want to stomp on the maintainers by merging them. I wonder if the script could mark ones that have had a review but not been merged yet after another week or so? Then we could merge those.
That’s an interesting idea, although I can’t immediately see an easy way to implement it. I feel the same as you that I don’t want to incur the wrath of the incumbent maintainer.
One thing I am planning is making a table of “who maintains what” using the DOAP data in the repos. Perhaps there’s some info we could add to this table that’d make it clearer how actively maintained a project is. It would at least make it easier to see who to check with before merging.
The problem is that even if there’s some people set as maintainers in the DOAP, it doesn’t actually mean the project is maintained. There isn’t even anybody to remove those people from the DOAP since there’s no active maintainer
That’s exactly the kind of thing that I hope we can improve. If the listed maintainers are inactive, then it’s all the more important that the rest of us encourage new contributors, by reviewing and merging things ourselves.
I wonder if the script could mark ones that have had a review but not been merged yet after another week or so? Then we could merge those.
Thinking about this some more, what if I link to the previous week’s post each time I post a new list? That lets us see everything from the previous week, at least.
Here some fresher merge requests,
