Just wanted to correct myself, I didn't mean to say "blamed", what I meant to say is "we should encourage groups to be equally proactive. Instead of thinking that QA will be seen as favorites or some other such thing, we should make it clear that we support our community always and we always support those who develop clear and well thought out strategies"
That's all, thanks again all. Best Regards, Joel On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Joel Madero <jmadero....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:38 AM, Bjoern Michaelsen < > bjoern.michael...@canonical.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 02:06:19PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: >> > The QA netbooks have already been discussed on QA Call. The idea is to >> have a >> > budget for a set of netbooks that we can give publically as prizes to >> our most >> > active QA contributors in QA marathons and triage contests. >> >> A few addition given the discussion: >> We will likely lend the netbooks to a set of QA volunteers. And those >> machines >> are not intended to let our QA volunteers play Starcraft, but to be able >> to >> triage -- possibly on multiple platforms -- without busting their usual >> work >> machine. >> >> Why only QA? Because QA did organize quite a few events (Bug Hunting >> Sessions, >> QA Marathons, QA Wochenende) making me confident they have the manpower to >> organize this. I did hard work to support Rainer, Joel, Florian and other >> to >> get QA rolling over the last year. Once other parts of the project get >> there, >> the same applies to them -- I am confident at that point they will file >> their >> own budget requests. >> >> Note also this is an opportunity that presented itself: E.g. for >> developers we >> cant easily do this as a developer machine for LibreOffice is quite a bit >> more >> expensive. >> >> Best, >> >> Bjoern >> >> > We will be discussing this tomorrow during our QA call if anyone wants to > join. We are still in the early stages of developing the time frame, rules, > etc... for the contest but hope to be done by Beta or RC of 4.1. > > As for the other comments, I think the main point is that the BoD is open > to suggestions, feedback and comments from any group within the project. > This being said, QA shouldn't be blamed for developing a clear goal and > strategy to reach this goal and then presenting it to the BoD. At that > point it's the BoD's job to determine if the request is valid. I am almost > positive that this would apply to any group within the project and if the > group could show that they were a) able to manage their request and b) had > a clear goal and plan to achieve it, the BoD would have an open mind to > most proposals. To me this is the foundation of our community. > > > Best Regards, > Joel > > > -- > *Joel Madero* > LibO QA Volunteer > jmadero....@gmail.com > > -- *Joel Madero* LibO QA Volunteer jmadero....@gmail.com
