Which is why I suggested an in-between person to help facilitate the developer <-> communities relationship.
Chad
On Jan 12, 2008 3:39 PM, Birgitte SB birgitte_sb@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
So, we usually have just to trust that people who
come and ask for
things can really represent community, and are not
going to undermine
something in evil ways. Usually we like to trust, and love to trust. But
sometimes a single
campaign against can shatter it all.
This might be a good place for local ArbComs to step in. They can determine consensus and make the request to developers. Developers trying to determine consensus, especially on projects in languages they don't speak, is pretty much impossible - it comes down to a (hopefully lucky) guess.
How should the devs know which communities have an Arbcom that needs to approve the bug? I think any system put in here needs to, by default, not interfere with the devs doing their work. Giving communities more opportunities to raise a flag before implementaion is good. But requiring the devs check with X before every implementation, or any process external to Bugzilla, is bad.
Birgitte SB
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l