Who reviews the contributions? It's a good idea when the project has other maintainers, but when the new person is the only one, that can't really work...
i mean adding a person to the maintainer community. the review can be spread over current members of the community. 5-10 current members review 1-2 patches each from a candidate, regardless of which project the candidate contributes to.
even if you limit that extra work on repos you personally don't care about to once a month you can help one person to join the community per year, which is enough for the membership in the community to double each year.
That would be good, although it would require maintainers to become familiar with repos they might not be, just to review the user's contributions. It's a very good idea, though, since the contributions can just be regular PRs.
Comments
how about a probation period? in that time, contributions are more actively reviewed than usual.
eg 3 months or 10 patches (whichever takes longer)
only after that they become a trusted member.
it's like joining any other project. new members need to show their will to contribute, and that doesn't necessarily relate to past contributions.
Who reviews the contributions? It's a good idea when the project has other maintainers, but when the new person is the only one, that can't really work...
i mean adding a person to the maintainer community. the review can be spread over current members of the community. 5-10 current members review 1-2 patches each from a candidate, regardless of which project the candidate contributes to.
even if you limit that extra work on repos you personally don't care about to once a month you can help one person to join the community per year, which is enough for the membership in the community to double each year.
That would be good, although it would require maintainers to become familiar with repos they might not be, just to review the user's contributions. It's a very good idea, though, since the contributions can just be regular PRs.