Re: DDG Tasks Bug Bounty Proposal

I don't think anyone is proposing that new developers get push access or bypass review by existing developers. We're all in agreement that it would not be acceptable. Matthew's question of how to avoid long review delays doesn't have a great answer; I can't think of anything beyond keeping the

Re: DDG Tasks Bug Bounty Proposal

Steve Dougherty writes: > I don't think anyone is proposing that new developers get push access > or bypass review by existing developers. We're all in agreement that > it would not be acceptable. Matthew's question of how to avoid long > review delays doesn't have a great

Re: DDG Tasks Bug Bounty Proposal

On Monday, May 08, 2017 08:29:45 PM Matthew Toseland wrote: > Having said that, review capacity has been a problem in the past. My > purge-db4o work was delayed for an entire year, for example. How can we > minimise this? Just because our existing core contributors with review privileges aren't

Re: DDG Tasks Bug Bounty Proposal

If the USA would consider paying anonymous people money laundering then I'd agree that we shouldn't risk this. Nevertheless you raised an interesting issue which will also be relevant to non-anonymous employees, I'd like to say something about it: On Monday, May 08, 2017 04:57:10 PM Ian wrote:

Re: DDG Tasks Bug Bounty Proposal

On Tuesday, May 09, 2017 09:12:21 AM x...@freenetproject.org wrote: > On Monday, May 08, 2017 04:57:10 PM Ian wrote: > > There is also a trust issue, since we would probably need to give them > > access to source repos and other things - and it would be irresponsible to > > do that with someone we

Re: Potential source of funding and bug finding

On Mon, 2017-05-08 at 20:09 +, Freenet wrote: > To qualify for these rewards, a project needs to have a large user > base and/or be critical to global IT infrastructure. Which of those two requirements do you think that Freenet fulfils? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed