[Development] proposing Richard Moore as approver
rich at kde.org
Thu Nov 17 22:08:56 CET 2011
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:49 PM, <marius.storm-olsen at nokia.com> wrote:
> On 11/16/11 6:07 PM, "ext Sven Anderson" <Sven.Anderson at snom.com> wrote:
>>Am 02.11.2011 11:14, schrieb Olivier Goffart:
>>> But am I alone to think that 3 weeks of waiting time is a lot?
>>> 15 work day is a lot, how about reducing it to something between 7 and
>>> work days?
>>OTOH, is this really a time-critical process? In doubt I would choose
>>the longer option, not the shorter.
> The whole point of the time period is to enable key personnel which might
> be on vacation, sick or otherwise indisposed, to be able to react. 15
> business days is normally enough to catch that, while 7-10 days normally
> isn't. (People tend to take 2 week vacations from work, and not so much 3
> weeks or more)
> It will not affect their ways of working, since those people should even
> from before they get a nomination be working *as if* they already had the
> role. The only difference is that after the 15 days they will get a +2
> instead of the +1. Nothing else really changes. (Yes, they get a "Stage"
> button too, but normally the Author pushes that button)
I've refrained from commenting on this thread so far, but I'll give
some feedback now from the 'waiting to be able to approve' side of the
The 15 working day waiting period does seem quite long, but from the
point of view of getting stuff approved hasn't really been a problem.
I suspect if I were looking at another area where there wasn't an
existing person or people who could apply my commits then this would
be more of a pain. I think that in areas with no existing active
maintainer this may be an issue (as would getting the approval request
in the first place).
What has actually been more annoying is the lack of the ability to
mark bugs as closed in JIRA, and otherwise change the state of bugs.
I've regularly been starting off the day by asking for bugs to be
closed that I've fixed, or in one case that had already been fixed by
an earlier commit. I don't think it's helpful that the bug tracker has
open bugs where the original reported has already confirmed we've
So from my point of view:
1) the 15 working days is fine
2) granting the jira access earlier would make sense
I think there are some other 'teething troubles' with the way things
are working right now, but I don't feel the process for getting
approver status is a particular problem.
More information about the Development