Fedora Developer Ranking System v1
Karel Zak
kzak at redhat.com
Tue Feb 27 18:42:24 UTC 2007
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 07:40:49PM -0500, Warren Togami wrote:
> ==================================================
> = Strawman of Fedora Developer Ranking System v1 =
> ==================================================
> This concept document contains only *IDEAS* of why we would want a
> ranking system, and how a ranking system might be useful. Below are
> only examples. Please add your ideas to this thread.
Overkill :-). Sorry, this word comes to mind when I read your
concept.
> - Who Are You? As the project grows, you can't possibly know all
> contributors on the other side of the project. Viewing that
> member's stat page gives you a convenient snapshot of what they are
> working on, who they work with, who sponsored, who promoted, etc.
Frankly, you can send me a patch from Mars and I will always
independently or your name check technical quality of the patch only.
If you send me good patches often I will decide to give you write
access to SCM. This is the way.
(BUT.. in distributed development model (and SCM) you needn't any
access. You need to send me "please, pull from scm://..." only.)
> Each rank will have formal written description of rough requirements
> and
You cannot describe these things (see Jeff's mail). It's more colored
and more difficult than someone of us is able to describe.
> responsibilities. (Example: FD3 requires 17 quality reviews or 9
> owned packages and shows clear competence in package guidelines.
> FD4 requires
9 packages? Define the "package"? Kernel or gnome-sudoku?
17 quality reviews? Review of what? Patch to kernel or to any man
page?
Please, keep things simple. Nobody wants to study your wiki, nobody
wants to fight with our processes. I believe we want to work with
minimal overhead.
Smart people needn't strong rules. Intelligent and responsible people
need freedom.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak at redhat.com>
More information about the Fedora-maintainers
mailing list