[haiku-development] Re: Voting procedure (was: Checking consistency of used strings)
- From: David McPaul <dlmcpaul@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:35:18 +1100
2009/12/16 Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>:
> On 2009-12-15 at 22:22:40 [+0100], PulkoMandy <pulkomandy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> For commit access, usually there are only +1 votes, I think that explains
>> the low interest : it should probably be presented as a "if you don't want
>> this guy to get commit access, tell us why now, or it will be too late".
>
> That wouldn't change anything. The problem with commit access votes is that
> you should only vote at all when you can judge the candidate's skills. I.e.
> if you've never read a patch from her/him, you shouldn't vote +1 (or -1 for
> that matter). Unfortunately that costs time and most people don't have or
> take it. Which kind of shifts the main responsibility to the developer
> proposing the candidate. I think no-one should propose to give someone
> commit access, unless she/he has very thoroughly read prior patches/work
> written by the candidate. Votes starting with "Hey, why not given X and Y
> commit access?" are simply a no-go, IMHO.
>
> Also before actually starting a commit access vote, it should first be
> asked whether there are general concerns. Otherwise those will be raised
> after half a dozen people have already cast their perfunctory vote, which
> is a somewhat awkward situation.
>
> Whether formal metrics might help, I don't know. It probably doesn't harm
> to have a rough guideline, to prevent people from being suggested for
> commit access who have only committed a few minor patches. But I don't
> think their should be any kind of automatism, that someone is suggested,
> just because the minimum patch count or whatever has been reached.
I think we need more developers. So if one comes along that is able
to download the source code, compile it all and then submit patches
that solves issues in a reasonably competent way then grant them
access.
As for other issues, it is hard enough to get agreement with several
people in room together able to discuss and debate freely let alone
across a medium like e-mail where a question and response can take
hours or days. For most things I think don't be afraid to just do it
and see who yells at you. Those that do are the people you need to
discuss options with and implement changes.
--
Cheers
David
Other related posts:
