[haiku-development] Re: Voting procedure (was: Checking consistency of used strings)
- From: Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:38:43 +0100
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.
CU, Ingo
Other related posts:
