| 1 |
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 21:00:24 -0500 |
| 2 |
Dane Smith <c1pher@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> I whole-heartedly disagree with this. First off, the "line in the |
| 5 |
> sand" concept is completely unnecessary in this case. It barely makes |
| 6 |
> sense when it's used on a massive scale (can't drink until 21 in the |
| 7 |
> US), and it only makes sense there because people could not feasibly |
| 8 |
> be evaluated on an individual basis. In this case, quite clearly they |
| 9 |
> can. Either they have the skills and the motivation, or they don't. |
| 10 |
> Some x month line in the sand makes no difference at all and merely |
| 11 |
> slows people down who would like to help and contribute. We have |
| 12 |
> enough hurdles around here. Why add more? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Because these half year olds would despite their limited experience |
| 15 |
gain direct access to the big red stop button on the pole in the sand |
| 16 |
that's coupled to someone else's commit privileges. I think six months |
| 17 |
isn't nearly enough. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> The same can be said for the quiz. If the current QA lead would like |
| 20 |
> to decide that way, it should be up to him. But on the whole it |
| 21 |
> should be the QA leads decision. Personally I think the idea is kind |
| 22 |
> of crazy, and seems like a waste of time. Evaluation can be done |
| 23 |
> quite easily on a case by case basis. Why bother with quizzes? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
As above. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Having inexperienced developers who are apparently very eager to start |
| 28 |
"enforcing" QA through devrel - that's rather scary too. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
jer |
Archives