On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 14:18 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > People like quantitative criteria because they can be applied without > judgement and with no perception of bias. "Everyone has to wait 6 > months, so > it's not unfair we say you need to wait too". I really think that > our > process is about developers judging the person ready to become a > developer > and anything more specific we try to require will end up being > problematic.
I completely agree. MOTU and core-dev membership is a combination of * technical knowledge [for which two key points apply: arbitrary have-done-X metrics don't assess any more reliably than peer assessment of the work done, and the knowledge ages rapidly as technologies change. Packaging of python today is not the same as it was 5 years ago]. * trust - which is entirely subjective * fitting in the team - which can be assessed by who objects :) Someone having done a certain number of bug reports or new packages or merges is not a replacement for peer assessment; if anything it makes joining MOTU harder because rather than just demonstrating the required capabilities and personal attributes folk interested in joining would now have a number of tick-box things to complete, which are neither necessary nor sufficient for demonstrating that they are ready to become a MOTU or core dev. -Rob -- GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
