On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Nathan Haines <nhai...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 12:43 +0300, Ddorda wrote: >> I believe that after that, the criteria for get approved should be >> easier to achieve, since it has more weight. > > One might as easily say that because the distinction has more weight, > that the criteria for approval should become more stringent. > > In my opinion, the current criteria to become approved are actually > quite suitable--a group must mostly just show a sustained history of > advocacy.
+1 here, we just look that the team is doing good work over a length of time that's sane. As long as you show consistent work, it's tough to *not* get approved :) > > -- > Nathan Haines <nhai...@ubuntu.com> > Ubuntu - http://www.ubuntu.com/ > > > -- > loco-contacts mailing list > loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts > -- All programmers are playwrights, and all computers are lousy actors. #define sizeof(x) rand() :wq -- loco-contacts mailing list loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts
