| 1 |
On 03/18/2010 04:34 PM, Ben de Groot wrote: |
| 2 |
> Recruitment being the bottleneck that it is (with candidates |
| 3 |
> waiting many months), it is good to have another option |
| 4 |
> for people who want to contribute. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
If we do have a list of people waiting to get in, could we maybe publish |
| 7 |
this list somewhere, or instruct these people to look for |
| 8 |
maintainer-wanted bugs and offer their services as proxy-maintainers? |
| 9 |
Can we have some way of communicating that one of these almost-devs has |
| 10 |
written some ebuilds so that devs can work with them to get them committed? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
This would get them a head-start and will give them VERY practical |
| 13 |
instruction. For the devs that work with them they'll know that they're |
| 14 |
working with somebody with a long-term interest. I'm not sure that we |
| 15 |
want a policy that states that when the recruits become devs that they |
| 16 |
will maintain these packages long-term, but it would be nice if they did so. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Perhaps the devs could also provide feedback to the recruiters on the |
| 19 |
recruit's strong/weak points so that they could work on these. (NOTE - |
| 20 |
I'm not suggesting marking people for exclusion here - if somebody is |
| 21 |
fairly raw we want to work with them, but it doesn't hurt for the |
| 22 |
recruiters to know about that up-front.) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I realized that some of these ideas are still half-baked, but I'm |
| 25 |
wondering if there isn't an opportunity here. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Rich |
Archives