- Mailing Lists
- Contributors
- Re: PSC responsabilities
Archives
- By thread 1419
-
By date
- August 2019 59
- September 2019 118
- October 2019 165
- November 2019 97
- December 2019 35
- January 2020 58
- February 2020 204
- March 2020 121
- April 2020 172
- May 2020 50
- June 2020 158
- July 2020 85
- August 2020 94
- September 2020 193
- October 2020 277
- November 2020 100
- December 2020 159
- January 2021 38
- February 2021 87
- March 2021 146
- April 2021 73
- May 2021 90
- June 2021 86
- July 2021 123
- August 2021 50
- September 2021 68
- October 2021 66
- November 2021 74
- December 2021 75
- January 2022 98
- February 2022 77
- March 2022 68
- April 2022 31
- May 2022 59
- June 2022 87
- July 2022 141
- August 2022 38
- September 2022 73
- October 2022 152
- November 2022 39
- December 2022 50
- January 2023 93
- February 2023 49
- March 2023 106
- April 2023 47
- May 2023 69
- June 2023 92
- July 2023 64
- August 2023 103
- September 2023 91
- October 2023 101
- November 2023 94
- December 2023 46
- January 2024 75
- February 2024 79
- March 2024 104
- April 2024 63
- May 2024 40
- June 2024 160
- July 2024 80
- August 2024 70
- September 2024 62
- October 2024 121
- November 2024 117
- December 2024 89
- January 2025 59
- February 2025 104
- March 2025 96
- April 2025 107
- May 2025 52
- June 2025 72
- July 2025 60
- August 2025 81
- September 2025 124
- October 2025 63
- November 2025 22
Contributors
Re: PSC responsabilities
Hello, thank you for doing this analysis. In the same ideia, I think we should somewhat promote the module maintainers. And the same logic could apply: if module maintainers don't do their job during a reasonable amount of time (like no module review during 18 months? 12 months?) then IMHO they should lose their maintainers status and other maintainers should be promoted. Yes, at the moment people don't participate too much because this is mostly a burden. However it's expected the OCA keeps growing and eventually by highlighting better modules authors and maintainers we manage to make it a little bit more attractive without spoiling it (cause yes there are already people doing astroturfing in the OCA sadly).
by "Raphaƫl Valyi" <rvalyi@akretion.com> - 06:58 - 31 Dec 2025
Reference
-
PSC responsabilities
Hi everyone,I was preparing this year Ranking of contributors and I am concerned on some information I found when crossing this data with PSCs.I found several PSCs that are not involved into their respective repositories. For example, I found a PSC team that has 5 members, 3 of them participated in 1% of the PR, on of them on the 15% and the last one on 98%. The repository was big (more than 400 PR on one year). In other examples, the PSC only participated in their team PRs.Even in my case, I think I need to improve my collaboration as a PSC.I think we need to improve this situation as a Community, otherwise, people will loose faith in the PSCs and how OCA works. Some ideas I can think about:- Control PSCs on big repositories (it is hard to set a proper KPI on small repos)- Demote PSCs that are not contributing properly according to this KPIs- Review this KPIs yearly- Split bigger PSCs in order to avoid too much work- Avoid people to be PSC of more than 3 big PSC Teams- Give PSCs some extra benefits (lower fees on OCA days, special t-shirts...)- Give PSCs recognition of their work (easy to say, hard to think about it)Maybe I am dramatic here, but I think it is important. WDYT? Shall we do something about it?Kind regards,--Enric Tobella AlomarCEO & Founder
by Enric Tobella Alomar - 10:16 - 30 Dec 2025