On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Yuvi Panda <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Erik Moeller <[email protected]> wrote: > > Option D: We come up with some kind of open process for > > designating/confirming folks as architects, according to some > > well-defined criteria (including minimum participation in the RFC > > process, well-defined domain expertise in certain areas, a track > > record of constructive engagement, etc.). Organizations like WMF can > > choose to recognize this role as they see fit (likely according salary > > increases to individuals who demonstrate successful architectural > > leadership), but it’s a technical leadership role that’s awarded by > > Wikimedia’s larger technical community, similar to +2 status. > > I like this in theory, though I fear that this will somehow lead to a > state in some ways similar to the enwiki RfA process... > Hi Yuvi, I think that's probably a good observation and comparison, but could you expand on which qualities the RfA process you'd like to avoid? Rob _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
