On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 09:48 -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote: > > didn't he ask for people who know a particular application very well? > > If you actually read the GLEP, you will note that there is a provision > to expand the idea to include herd testers.
someone might like to help with testing one or a few packages, w/o the full load of being a herd tester, since he might know nothing about the other packages in that herd, while being very proficient with one package out of 5 different herds, so to help he would be part of those 5 herds, and if you then reply "well he could be marked as those packages in those herds" well then why not just keep a list of users per package we appreciate their help that way just as much w/o flooding them with "can you test xyz" "sorry, i only know klm in the herd" "oh, sorry, didn't check what package you help with, just the herd" scenarios less procedures, less hassle and hopefully in return even more involvement > > > i think there is a big difference between agreeing to test one > > particular package since they know it very well and want to make sure > > noone breaks it vs. being a full AT with all the things they get asked > > to test > > The "herd tester" concept would cover this as far as I can see. > so no, i don't think the blanket glep covers a per package list of user who are interested to help see it as an extension to the glep instead, another level of accepting and appreciating user contributions w/o burdening them with more than they might be interested in doing > -Steve > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
