-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
OK -- I can be persuaded to drop that proposal. In exchange though I will be doing what Sidney suggests -- pushing for reviews. I had been assuming that people would be keeping an eye on the bugzilla mail traffic, even while busy, because they were aware that R-T-C required reviews; but it seems that's not the case. (BTW that's how R-T-C is *supposed* to work...) I'll be ready to start hassling each person individually for reviews instead. ;) - --j. Sidney Markowitz writes: > I agree with Duncan that I don't see the need for this change as compared to > pushing harder for quick review and staying on the lookout for people we > would like to be committers. The problem I have with the change is that it > makes it easier for us to ignore items that are up for review because it > only requires one person besides the implementer to care about it. When > there is a bit of a crunch because we need reviewers, I think we all feel > more sense of responsibility. > > In less than three weeks I'm going from having a full time job plus being a > part time student to being just a full time thesis-only student. Even if I > get into a thesis crunch mode I should have more time for testing and > reviews than I have had during the months leading up to this. That pretty > much compensates for the one vote change. > > -- sidney > > --------------enig34BCB0E01A39E384B41A7377 > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" > Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature > Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32) > > iD8DBQFC+s/QM4VFrCxwb/MRAn5UAJ0aj6JrxHPu7E+9LoKYhuj67gxL9gCeMff1 > IB7OPp3xnGzaPzH7Km62wm4ãfX > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --------------enig34BCB0E01A39E384B41A7377-- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFC+9KQMJF5cimLx9ARAnv3AKC3Vd/WUJJuqqQ6+lS2173sn1g3LwCeMIj3 nM+fUgXcIh7+TNWW8khuXV8= =P7eg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
