[Qgis-psc] Criteria fro HF refunding

[Anita Graser]

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Paolo Cavallini <cavallini at faunalia.it>
wrote:

> the point, whatever approach we choose, is still the same: how to decide
> who's in and who's out? Without clear rules, PSC will be in trouble, and
> people unhappy.
> All the best.
>  <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc>
>


​Maybe we can have a voting on the different participant groups, for
example:

PSC
​:​
​ ​
+
​1

​C
ommitters
​:​
​ +1


​D​
ocumentors
​:​
​ -1 for general applicability but there might be reasons where a new
feature requires the direct communication between a dev and the documenter

​I​
nfrastructure maintainer
​: +1 direct exchange with infrastructure maintainers at the HF is
invaluable to improve our infrastructure situation imho ​

Anyone who contributed at
​ ​
least x lines of code
​:​
​ -1​
for general applicability but there might be
​cases where a specific topic needs particular HF attention (interactive
discussion of a new big idea/refactor) and the main developer might not be
a committer. ​


​Best wishes,
Anita​
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20150212/5c125420/attachment.html>