[Development] Approver status

[Turunen Tuukka]

On 25.5.2012 13.29, "andre.poenitz at nokia.com" <andre.poenitz at nokia.com>
wrote:

>
>The idea was not to have an over-engineered system of random rules, and
>also
>not to introduce a _scale_, but an extemely low and obviously reasonable
>cut-off
>point as a minimal barrier of entrance, serving as a guideline for the
>people
>doing the nomination, saving the hassle of discussing unreasonable
>nominations,
>and prevent the embarassement of being declined for the nominee.
>
>This was briefly discussed before opengov went public, but it wasn't
>formalized as 
>there was the assumption that the nominators would apply such "obviously
>reasonable" lower limits themselves. And yes, I think _that_ has failed
>(mostly
>because "JIRA work" currently "needs" it), that's why I came up with the
>proposal.

I think this is good because you tend to get what you measure.

I also think it is a good topic to discuss in the contributor summit.

And finally, I have not seen any problems so far. All approvers have done
good job from my viewpoint! In general I think we should have more
approvers as it is sometimes hard to find approvers for some contributions
(and overloading the same persons all the time is not optimal either).

Yours,

		Tuukka