Re: Membership

Kjartan Maraas <> writes:

> The problem is that there are just too many corner cases to cover.
> If we agree on a set of prerequisites someone has to satisfy to
> become a member these will probably never cover all cases anyway.
> This makes it neccesary to continuously monitor the amount of 
> work each hacker puts in. In addition to this we'll have to agree
> on a scale of points one achieves for work on specific modules or
> projects, etc, etc. This is a huge overhead that definitely isn't
> the reason for getting a foundation assembled. The reason this is
> needed is that we need a body that can take care of the _already
> existing_ tasks that are not and can not best be done by the hackers
> themselves, or am I missing something here?

Kjartan sums up what I was trying to say very well here. My problem is
that trying to generalize situations in which people donate to the
project is rather dangerous territory. I feel like people with real
important contributions could be ignored simply because they did not
meet some sort of screening process. 



David Mason
Red Hat Advanced Development Labs (919)547-0012 x248

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]