Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2009
G'day Nicholas / p5p, Nicholas Clark wrote: > There is no intended duration. I'd like to keep going until there are zero > open bugs. All other things ignored, there isn't enough money currently > to do that. One of my reasons for thinking about a time duration is so that: * It provides a point at which the rules can be adjusted without anyone crying foul. * It's a convenient time to add/remove judges, if required. * It's a good time to change the bounty pumpking. * It's a good time to extend the list of bugs which can be claimed. * It means we don't have people complaining that they had $450 in unclaimed bounties from six years ago, but now the bounty is closed / TPF has spent the money / they want to be a pain. We can have an expectation that the bounties will continue after each period, and that bounties earned get rolled-over, but we only guarantee that people will get their bounties if they reach the cash-out threshold before the end of the current cycle. > I think it's viable to allow individuals to agree to transfer their claimed > balance to another individual, so that that individual reaches the cash-out > limit, which provides de-facto teams. But I don't want to complicate > things with having to track teams, team affiliations, team disputes, etc. This is actually all the level of teaming that I'm after. ;) Cheerio, Paul -- Paul Fenwick <pjf@perltraining.com.au> | http://perltraining.com.au/ Director of Training | Ph: +61 3 9354 6001 Perl Training Australia | Fax: +61 3 9354 2681Thread Previous | Thread Next