Removing inactive members from the Docs FAS Group

David Nalley david.nalley at
Sun Jul 26 02:46:13 UTC 2009

On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Eric
Christensen<eric at> wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 13:59 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 02:22:50PM -0400, Eric Christensen wrote:
>> > The following members of the Docs FAS Group are showing as inactive in
>> > FAS.  Is there any reason to NOT remove these users from the Docs group?
>> Would this inactivity cause them to be unable to edit the wiki?  I
>> presume so, but at least one name on the list (sfolkwil) I thought had
>> contributed to one or both of the last sets of release notes (F9, F10).
>> IMO, as long as people are able to come back at will (probably by
>> re-introducing themselves, etc.), then it's really no worry, keep
>> things clean, etc.
> They can come back at any time.  No one on the list is anyone that has
> been active in the Docs Project in some time (that I'm aware of).
> I think that when the account goes inactive then their password is
> expired and they wouldn't be able to edit the wiki or access anything
> else that is FAS related until they do a password reset.
> Eric

We just did something similar in the Ambassadors.
That said, one of the eventualities is that Infrastructure will remove
all groups from the individual inactive account (I don't know the
timeline on this, the last time I asked Mike, he didn't have a firm
timeframe) The path of least resistance is to just wait on
infrastructure and they'll take care of it.
I'll note that other groups have a 'auto-expire' function that is even
more rigid, and perhaps might be something we should look into. AIUI,
one of those groups, Gnome, requires that every two years a
contributor. must essentially 're-apply' and justify their continued
membership in a given group. I want to say that Art does the same
thing, but I may be accusing them of that because Mo told me that's
what Gnome does.
The other question that exists, is what does docs group membership
mean. What benefits/responsibilities accrue to one holding such
membership. If nothing, perhaps we should do away with the group
altogether and just use the individual document FAS groups.

More information about the fedora-docs-list mailing list