On Saturday 22 July 2006 09:11, Rahul <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Paul W. Frields wrote: > >> 4) CLA completion and being part of atleast one specific Fedora group > >> like say Fedora Extras must be a requirement. Not everybody who has > >> signed the CLA has provided any meaningful contributions and thus are > >> not in the group of actual Fedora contributors. Having merely the CLA as > >> a requirement might be abused. > > > > How do we define being "part of" a group? Number of CVS commits? > > Number of emails posted to a list? Time on IRC? If you can provide an > > objective standard for this criterion, let's discuss it. > > Part of any Fedora group in the accounts system. > There is no reliable way to say who is active and who is not. It is trivial to gain membership in most of the groups in the Account System. Unless someone can think of a superior way to measure active contributors, I think the CLA requirement is the best we can do. -- Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes nman64@xxxxxxxxx http://www.n-man.com/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64 Have I been helpful? Rate my assistance! http://rate.affero.net/nman64/ --
Attachment:
pgpcVxtckIQov.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
