On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:48 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de>wrote:
> Not sure how well 'tit for tat' schemes work - we *could* require > that people don't commit unreviewed changes, and also require that > you can't commit unless you have reviewed somebody else's changes. > I wonder if a "reputation" scheme would work better. Track and publicize patch submissions, reviews, and the review/patch ratio, but do not enforce any particular ratios. Perhaps provide a roundup query showing patches awaiting review sorted by the patch submitter's review/patch ratio? (in descending order) Obviously there would be many non-trivial details to work out. I'm just brainstorming. -- Daniel Stutzbach, Ph.D. President, Stutzbach Enterprises, LLC <http://stutzbachenterprises.com/>
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
