On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 2:49 AM, Michael Snow <wikipe...@verizon.net> wrote: > ...if for example I was qualified to review a > staff member's patch (which I'm not), I might want to think twice about > what audience gets that feedback. > > --Michael Snow >
Why? If they're contributing a patch to MediaWiki, they should go through the same public patch/feedback -> commit/feedback cycle as everyone else. The only acceptable time to develop in private is when we're looking at active security vulnerabilities, and even then once a patch has been written the code is committed and the issue becomes public knowledge. Can we be a bit harsh sometimes? Sure. But we're equal opportunity offenders here. Anyone who submits code--staff or volunteer--is subject to the same treatment on Bugzilla and Code Review. If your patch sucks, we're going to tell you about it, and there's absolutely no reason to sugarcoat it. If someone can't take public criticism, then quite frankly they probably shouldn't be working on open source software. -Chad _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
