On 5/25/12 9:41 AM, "ext Thiago Macieira" <[email protected]> wrote:
>On sexta-feira, 25 de maio de 2012 06.27.13, [email protected] wrote: >> I agree with Andre. Currently we do not have any guiding criteria in >> place, so it's probably difficult to judge when someone is ready to be >> nominated as an approver. We've now had one or two cases where people >> where being nominated a bit too fast for my taste. >> >> But I'd propose that we have a discussion to nail down the details at >>the >> contributor summit. It's only a couple of weeks away, and these things >>are >> usually discussed a lot easier in such a setting. > >Hmm.. > >I think the rule-of-thumb guidance was part of the original project >goals, but >we never managed to come up with the numbers. I think it's good that the >project will be 9 months old by the time we try to come up with those >numbers. >We can look at past history and figure out what a committed contributor >does. Yes. And this is really something that is best discussed face to face. I don't want to put arbitrary restrictions here, but it's good if we have at least some rules of thumb that give guidance here. The current wording is very unclear. >> >On a related note, I also think it would be sensible to move the >> >barrier of entrance to "Handle JIRA" into the opposite direction. >> >Triaging issues or verification of fixes are definitely tedious and >> >reputable activities, but I don't think they necessarily need >> >preceding contributions, nor long term dedication. >> > >> >Andre' > >I agree on that too. Besides, helping in triaging *is* a form of >contribution. Yes, I think we all agree here. I'll try to push for some changes here again. On 5/25/12 10:55 AM, "ext Laszlo Papp" <[email protected]> wrote: >> I think that defining fixed number of LOC or hours spend on >> the project is not going to work. Please don't go there. > >I fully agree. I can understand the other Andre's point as well, but I >think those are really not too helpful measurements to introduce >unfortunately. > >Perhaps, I need to begin to write a QML2 application where I always >press the button, if I start working on Qt, and then stop that when I >finish. Just joking, for sure. :-) I can see that, and I don't want to have any strict criteria here, but I believe the current criteria are not well defined. WebKit for example does have some guidelines asking for a minimum number of accepted patches and proof that you have reviewed other people's patches. I'm not saying that we should go there, but I do believe we should have the discussion about it at the summit. Cheers, Lars _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
