On Fri, 2008-06-06 at 17:30 +0100, James Westby wrote: > > What happens after one week of no response? Approval by fiat? Or should > > bug-control administration act? > > My idea assumed that they would get responses very quickly, so the week > was just to make sure that there were no negative reviews that showed > up after the approval had gone through, so we would have > > Approval if there are two positive reviews, and no negative ones, and > at least a week has passed since the application. > > Do people think a week is a bit long here? >
I think a week is OK, given the dispersed nature of bug-control. But, still, what is no responses in a week, positive or negative? > > > > This is actually a good point. I suggest we propose that candidates > > should be present in the #ubuntu-bugs -- this will hopefully allow for > > interaction between candidates and others. This should help on receiving > > reviews. > > I'm all for encouraging people to this, but I don't think it should be > a requirement for a bugcontrol application. Sorry, I did not make myself clear. We must encourage bug-control candidates to be present in #ubuntu-bugs, but we should not make it a requirement. One of the ideas of bug-control people is that they are theoretically more up to speed on (do/do not)s for triaging, and should be available to help. Of course, this is not a requirement, and should not be used for/against membership. ..hggdh..
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/people/+me/+editemails More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
