On Wednesday, 2 de November de 2011 11:14:47 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 November 2011 16:00:30 Peter Hartmann wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > hereby I would like to propose Richard Moore as approver for the Qt
> > project.
> >
> > Rich has made numerous high-quality commits to the Qt SSL code and knows
> > Qt very well, being a KDE contributor since the very beginning.
> >
> > Shane Kearns and Martin Petersson second this proposal.
> >
> > Please raise any concerns you might have about this until 22nd of
> > November 2011 (see the guide lines at
> > http://wiki.qt-project.org/The_Qt_Governance_Model#How_to_become_an_Approv
> > er ).
>
> I know it is not needed, but I also recommand Richard as an approver.
>
> But am I alone to think that 3 weeks of waiting time is a lot?
> 15 work day is a lot,  how about reducing it to something between 7 and 10
> work days?

I think the number was chosen so that people who might be on vacations have
the time to react. But I agree it's a bit high.

--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
     Intel Sweden AB - Registration Number: 556189-6027
     Knarrarnäsgatan 15, 164 40 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Reply via email to