> HggdH wrote: > > I think that, given the status quo, giving bug-control access to > > selected MOTUs can actually help -- even if they restrict themselves to > > the infamous workflow bugs. > > All MOTU are currently granted membership in bugcontrol, and often > don't restrict themselves to only workflow bugs (it's tricky to fix a > bug without it being triaged, and the vast majority of bugs remain > untriaged despite our best efforts).
I expressed myself wrong -- The point was being made over a _prospective_ MOTU, not a current one. Sorry. > > > To my understanding monitoring them is similar to the monitoring that is > > (most certainly) already done on new bug-controllers: new people still > > have to show their worth, so this in no way imply selective distrust. > > Indeed. What else someone does (development, activism, art, etc.) > ought not have significant impact on their involvement with each team > with which they work. Of course, those who have shown themselves > responsible in other context may require less care, but that ought be > about the person, rather than about the other roles that person fills. > The most important reason for monitoring any person on a new task is to correct & train, not to curtail. So, yes, I agree with you, and consider myself corrected. ..hggdh.. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
