On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Robert Collins <[email protected]> wrote: > I completely agree. MOTU and core-dev membership is a combination of > * technical knowledge [for which two key points apply: arbitrary > have-done-X metrics don't assess any more reliably than peer assessment > of the work done, and the knowledge ages rapidly as technologies change. > Packaging of python today is not the same as it was 5 years ago]. > * trust - which is entirely subjective > * fitting in the team - which can be assessed by who objects :)
Okay, so I'll restate my point in another way ... If there is *no* objective component to MOTU/CoreDev application assessment, then I don't think it's fair to make arbitrary, *quantitative* criticisms on an application. Criticisms of the form: * You haven't done enough merges * You haven't touched enough Universe packages * You haven't been a MOTU or Developer long enough * You haven't ... enough ... should be invalid. These things are actually measurable, and we could very well set the value of "enough". If we are consciously choosing *not* to set these values, I think it's totally unfair to criticize someone for not achieving these arbitrary, dynamic, mystery thresholds. :-Dustin -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
