GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 671970
Cannot remove inactive members
Last modified: 2015-08-15 10:58:12 UTC
It is about the team page for logged-in coordinator (i.e. http://l10n.gnome.org/teams/sk/ ) All active members have combobox with available actions beside them. Inactive members do not have it, thus making it impossible to remove any of the inactive members from team. Please add the combobox for inactive members or any other way to manage them.
I agree with you. I't would be useful to be able to remove inactive members from the team's page.
Hi, folks. Remove the inactive members from team maybe be a bit rude, like discuted this bug: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=634130
Pavol and Daniel, as #634130 is fixed, would you say that is enough or you still like the idea to actually remove translators? I would agree with Adorilson regarding just marking them as inactive. So if no further action is needed/wished from your side we can happily close thi bug :)
I still think a «Remove» option is needed (or maybe a «Hide» one), since the inactive members list can be really long, and it has no sense to keep it forever. For example, take a look to ur team's page: http://l10n.gnome.org/teams/es/ The inactive members list is really long and I should mark as inactive some members actually marke as active. If it isn't a really hard task (I agree with just hidding them, you don't have to remove these entries from the database if you don't like the idea) I'd like to have this feature available. I'm Cc-ing Ana Rey, since she is starting to hack this module, so she could be interested in helping you with it. Many thanks Gil for your interest in this issue!
Really, remove is *needed*? I do really like to put stories and user cases, so... Say you are not the Spanish coordinator, and one they you heard about the GTP and decide to contribute your free time to help translating GNOME into Spanish. Now 4 months later, because you got an amazing job at Google/Mozilla/Red Hat/Collabora you don't have time anymore to do translations. Fast forward, half a year later after doing your last translation you got vacations and you put some days aside to do what you loved those days that you have free time: translate GNOME into Spanish! Unlucky you, the coordinator decided the week before to remove you from the team, so you find yourself puzzled as *why* do you have to apply for membership in that group if you were already there? And you start thinking "do they really kick me out?! No way I will keep helping them if they kick people around just due to inactivity!" Anyway, I would propose that, just like we have a "Hide completed modules" on module sets pages, we add a "Show inactive members" and thus by default that list is collapsed and you don't see them. Is that ok with you?
Ok, I agree with the idea about adding a "Show inactive members", so the list won't be visible by default. I agree and understand your "dramatic case" ;-), but now consider you want to join our team, and first you visit our team's page at DL. You can see there are several active members (I should polish that list... actually, we just have about 5 or 6 active translators), but you also see a lot of inactive members. What does it means? There is no pending work in this team? Coordinator is a BOFH that kicks out people? Hidding the list is a good idea, since people doesn't need to see in their first visit how many people is inactive (most of them, said hello in the mailing list, but they didn't translate anything...). Also, going back to your example, if a translator is flagged as inactive, coordinator has no way to return he/she to the active members list. This option is also needed. So, for me is ok to have a show/hide inactive members link, hidding the list by default and, if possible, add a "Flag as active member" to inactive members". Thanks!
(In reply to comment #6) > Also, going back to your example, if a translator is flagged as inactive, > coordinator has no way to return he/she to the active members list. This option > is also needed. This is automatically done when the user submit any new action.
Ah, ok, I didn't know it. In this case, we can forget about it ;) Thanks!
I aggree with "Show inactive members". But, maybe be cool to remove the members that "said hello in the mailing list, but they didn't translate anything", too. These I think be a "serious" problem.
(In reply to comment #9) > But, maybe be cool to remove the members > that "said hello in the mailing list, but they didn't translate anything", too. > These I think be a "serious" problem. How is that a problem? If they simply wrote to the list, they don't have an account on Damned lies so they won't appear in the member list. If they created an account and joined the team, then their account will automatically be marked as inactive as time passes and nothing is done with the account.
(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > But, maybe be cool to remove the members > > that "said hello in the mailing list, but they didn't translate anything", too. > > These I think be a "serious" problem. > > How is that a problem? If they simply wrote to the list, they don't have an > account on Damned lies so they won't appear in the member list. If they created > an account and joined the team, then their account will automatically be marked > as inactive as time passes and nothing is done with the account. I want to mean that one create (and confirm) a account on Damned Lies, but they didn't translate anything. Sorry. The problem is the "fake" translator, so a false big team, even though they are marked as inactive.
(In reply to comment #11) > I want to mean that one create (and confirm) a account on Damned Lies, but they > didn't translate anything. Sorry. The problem is the "fake" translator, so a > false big team, even though they are marked as inactive. Should we initially mark translators as inactive at creation time, so as their first action will make them active?
(In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #11) > > I want to mean that one create (and confirm) a account on Damned Lies, but they > > didn't translate anything. Sorry. The problem is the "fake" translator, so a > > false big team, even though they are marked as inactive. > > Should we initially mark translators as inactive at creation time, so as their > first action will make them active? +1
(In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #11) > > I want to mean that one create (and confirm) a account on Damned Lies, but they > > didn't translate anything. Sorry. The problem is the "fake" translator, so a > > false big team, even though they are marked as inactive. > > Should we initially mark translators as inactive at creation time, so as their > first action will make them active? This seems a good action, too. But until dont get my point. The workflow of register is: a) people create a account b) DL send a confirmation email c) people confirm the account and people became a active translator If c) is dont make, DL is cleaned. With this dont garanted that the people really do something. Same if in c) we put in a inactive state, it even is a "translator", and we will be a big false team. Then, I think we need think about really remove/delete the people that never contributed. For us work on real numbers: how people never contributed? do you could do this query? And the total of translator, of course. In particular, I would like this numbers on pt_br team. By other hand, maybe https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=624140 can to minimize this problem.
Closing as inactive members are hidden by default and we don't intend to do more than that.