On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 3:38 AM, Mani A <a.mani.cms(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I think the best way to measure it is through a simple credit
1. a.) Ambassador /prospective ambassador reads *important* article
(Only some articles may be eligible for credit)
b.) Prospective ambassador answers related multiple choice questions
c.) If a minimum score of 90% is not attained, then the candidate
goes through the whole process again.
On successful completion, candidate gets 1 credit or some credit.
Bad bad idea. As others said, Fedora is a community and not a
corporate. So there should not be any rankings but only arying degree
of responsibilities which is decided in the process itself.
2. a.) Ambassador/prospective ambassador contributes X no of
to a Fedora project.
A lot of people I know who do not commit code, but are
good ambassadors (I don't want to start giving examples).
Only exceptionally hard working programmers should be able to become
ambassadors based on their code contribution alone.
What if the person is extremely smart and outgoing and diplomatic and
has all those other qualities that makes him just perfect for te ob of
an ambassador, only ting he lacks is that he is management student and
knows noting about programming.Should he be denied the opportunity to
3. Ambassador /prospective ambassador writes a article in
This is getting long.
Shall I make a wiki page for the evaluation system?
IMHO you should wait for some more responses before you decide to
invest your valuable time.
Please don't get the idea that I am against mentoring or sponsoring. I
strongly support it. I only wanted to put forward to you my
understanding of the matter in hand.
Rangeen Basu Roy Chowdhury