ProvenTesters Sponsorship

[John Dulaney]

All: My only comment is that it seems that #2 would certainly lengthen meeting times.  I myself don't object to this as I do not currently have a job, but one of these days that may impede my ability to make said meetings.

> Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 16:47:21 -0500
> Subject: ProvenTesters Sponsorship
> From: maxamillion at fedoraproject.org
> To: test at lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
> 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 ;)
> 
> -AdamM
> 
> [0] - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/JoinProvenTesters
> 
> -- 
> http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> ()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
> /\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments
> -- 
> test mailing list
> test at lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe: 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/attachments/20100706/afe740ae/attachment.html