[Development] Approver status

[lars.knoll at nokia.com]

On 5/25/12 9:41 AM, "ext Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macieira at intel.com>
wrote:

>On sexta-feira, 25 de maio de 2012 06.27.13, lars.knoll at nokia.com 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" <lpapp at kde.org> 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