On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 08:10 -0500, Adam Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 16:47 -0500, Adam Miller wrote: > >> Hello testers! > >> > >> I wanted to open a conversation on the list about how we want to as a > >> group handle sponsorship. I wanted to propose two ideas I had and > >> leave the floor open for other suggestions. > >> > >> 1) Allow the sponsors/mentors to individually decide upon new > >> proventesters FAS group menbers when they feel the person they are > >> mentoring is "ready" > >> 2) Have a vote process such that when a proventester-to-be (i.e.- > >> currently being mentored) is considered familiar enough with the > >> processes by their mentor and has shown a track record of good testing > >> practices that they are to present their formal request to the current > >> proventesters at a QA meeting and then a vote is given? > >> > >> The way it is currently outlined in the wiki[0] leans more the > >> direction of option 2 but I wanted to bring it up as I think each > >> option has some benefits. I like option 1 because the mentor is going > >> to be the one who ultimately has (or should have) the closest working > >> relationship with the person they are mentoring and therefore would be > >> the best judge upon when they are "ready." I however also like option > >> 2 because it feels like a more formal process and allows for some more > >> uniformity on how decisions are made, allows for the group as a > >> community to constructively critique their peers as well as offers a > >> little more oversight in the process. > >> > >> I also wanted to point out concerns I have with each. Option 1 I feel > >> could spawn some feeling of chaos where people are getting added > >> "willy nilly" (cheesy saying, I know ... ) and I worry that Option 2 > >> could run us into the situation where we could be preventing testers > >> from joining in with their critpath contributions (example: request > >> comes in on a Tuesday, we have to cancel the meeting the following > >> Monday for some reason .... 2 weeks go by for sponsorship in FAS). > >> > >> Just my thoughts, please reply with questions, comments, and if need > >> be ... snide remarks ;) > > > > Most definitely Option 1, Option 2 is way too much bureaucracy. This > > ain't the Order of the Bath. > > > > I am perfectly happy for people to be added willy-nilly, it's really not > > a problem in my opinion. The reason the group exists is simply to give > > us a control mechanism so that we can take people *out* of it if > > necessary. I don't view it as a terrible disaster if we let someone into > > the group who turns out to either a) suck or b) be be evil, because the > > whole point is that we can then quite easily take them out again. The > > application process and the FAS group are really just there to ensure > > that we have that escape valve, and to provide a little hoop for people > > to jump through so we know they care at least a little bit. That's all. > > > > For me, the only question to settle is if we make every proventester > > member able to sponsor new members, or just ones who express an interest > > in being mentors. > > -- > > Adam Williamson > > Fedora QA Community Monkey > > IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org > > http://www.happyassassin.net > > > > -- > > test mailing list > > test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > To unsubscribe: > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test > > > > Sounds good to me and seems like others share the opinion, I will > update the wiki today to reflect the change as well as add the step > for applying to FAS in the table as fenris02 pointed out to me that it > appears to be missing. Thanks for initiating this topic Adam. I don't have strong opinions here, but I could see your option#2 being used in the event (hopefully unlikely) that we need to provide a more consistent screening process for proventesters. What you guys have both established seems like a good first-time process, light-weight ... not too many rules/restrictions. Thanks, James
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
